ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 

Notices


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags crypto-archaeology , Noah's Ark

Reply
Old 28th April 2010, 10:59 PM   #321
kerikiwi
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,175
Originally Posted by Radrook View Post
Interestingly, British civil and mechanical engineer Isambard Kingdom Brunel built a steamship (the Great Britain) in 1843 that had almost the same proportions as the Ark, although it was smaller. This was regarded as a remarkable feat of Victorian and maritime engineering. The Great Britain was the first large vessel to be propelled by a screw propeller.
Why is that interesting?
kerikiwi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th April 2010, 11:02 PM   #322
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 41,817
Originally Posted by Radrook View Post
Interestingly, British civil and mechanical engineer Isambard Kingdom Brunel built a steamship (the Great Britain) in 1843 that had almost the same proportions as the Ark, although it was smaller. This was regarded as a remarkable feat of Victorian and maritime engineering. The Great Britain was the first large vessel to be propelled by a screw propeller.http://www.creationtips.com/arksize.html

[bolding mine]

The Great Britain
Length: 322 ft (98.15 m) Beam (width): 50 ft 6 in (15.39 m) Height (main deck to keel): 32 ft 6 in (9.91 m) Weight unladen: 1,930 long tons (2,161 short tons, 1,961 tonnes) Displacement: 3,018 long tons (3,380 short tons, 3,066 tonnes)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Great_Britain


Above is the statement I referred to. It's the size alone he is referring to as considered impressive for those times I suppose since the materials are different.
Possibly the most irrevalent post in this thread, and there have been many. The new Queen Mary is probably bigger than the fictional ark, but I can't be bothered looking it up.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th April 2010, 11:12 PM   #323
akama1
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 285
Originally Posted by Radrook View Post
Because there is no need to. The standard procedure is to buld a model. That's the way its done with airplanes as well when testing for design stabiliy. They place it in a wind tunnel and place the model under the equivalent stresses that the full version is expected to undergo. If it holds up-then the large version will also. According to the tersts done on the ark models built to equivalent specifications, it's seaworthy. My question is does anyone have the results of some other identical test but with negative resiults.?
Hold up right here. Reading this, I can see you don't quite understand the results achieved in model testing and what you can get from it.

When testing an Aeroplane in a windtunnel , yes the are testing design stability, but not of the internal design, Using solid models they are testing the Aerodynamic shape and looking at what stresses the profile create, areas of air resistance etc. What they are not testing is how well they have built the internal structure. No aircraft company in the world would design a model, test it, and then put it straight into manufacture without doing exhausting tests on actual crafts afterwards.

Having an exact model of the ark work fine in a water test does not mean the same model scaled up would work just as well, The strengths of materials do not scale like that. A model test of the Ark would tell us what kind of drag etc the ark of that design would face, but not that the wall design would hold when scaled up, or that the beams would not snap etc.

You come across the same problems in the 9/11 truth forum. truthers can not understand their "models" of the world trade centres can not accurately model the stresses the construction materials faced on that day. Dropping one cardboard box onto another and saying "see, it did not pancake" does not invalidate what happened. The same as having a wooden model of the ark and saying, see it floats fine, So it must work full size, does not make this any more true.

Engineering and science do not work that way, As much as you may like it to
akama1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th April 2010, 11:39 PM   #324
Radrook
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,834
Originally Posted by kerikiwi View Post
Why is that interesting?

He, the author, said that I didn't.
Radrook is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th April 2010, 11:43 PM   #325
JoeyDonuts
Frequencies Not Known To Normals
 
JoeyDonuts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 10,536
Are you in the habit of posting things and immediately backtracking from them once it's revealed to you how ridiculous they sound in context?

Or are you posting things you don't agree with for some reason?

If you didn't find it interesting, why post it at all? For some reason it seemed pertinent to you.

You know what? Don't answer that. It's rhetorical.
__________________
EXIT STAGE LEFT! EXIT STAGE RIGHT! THERE IS NO PLACE TO RUN; ALL THE FUSES IN THE EXIT SIGNS HAVE BEEN BURNED OUT!
JoeyDonuts is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th April 2010, 11:43 PM   #326
Zep
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,699
Originally Posted by Radrook View Post
Interestingly, British civil and mechanical engineer Isambard Kingdom Brunel built a steamship (the Great Britain) in 1843 that had almost the same proportions as the Ark, although it was smaller. This was regarded as a remarkable feat of Victorian and maritime engineering. The Great Britain was the first large vessel to be propelled by a screw propeller.http://www.creationtips.com/arksize.html

[bolding mine]

The Great Britain
Length: 322 ft (98.15 m) Beam (width): 50 ft 6 in (15.39 m) Height (main deck to keel): 32 ft 6 in (9.91 m) Weight unladen: 1,930 long tons (2,161 short tons, 1,961 tonnes) Displacement: 3,018 long tons (3,380 short tons, 3,066 tonnes)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Great_Britain


Above is the statement I referred to. It's the size alone he is referring to as considered impressive for those times I suppose since the materials are different.
The comparison is in reference to the dimensional ratios of 30:5:3. Actually “the ugly duckling”—a barge-like boat built to carry tremendous amounts of cargo, and one that had the same ratio.
Just one thing...this was an IRON ship. NOT WOOD.

I now suspect you don't bother to read your own references, let alone any we give you.
Zep is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th April 2010, 11:44 PM   #327
Complexity
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 9,242
Originally Posted by Radrook View Post
He, the author, said that I didn't.

Well, you quoted the author (or provided a link to what he wrote - no difference).

Unless you clearly state otherwise (or your use of it is obviously parody, etc.), it is reasonable to assume that you endorse the author's words.

You certainly bring enough of them to our attention. You wouldn't ask us to waste our time on words that you don't stand behind, would you?

You are trying to weasel your way out of the consequences of your bad habit of quoting and linking to (and writing) fundie idiocy.
Complexity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 12:00 AM   #328
Radrook
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,834
Thumbs down

.My response was to the objection that nothing about seaworthiness could be known about the ark unless one built a full sized one. I then informed the person that scale models are built in order to assess seaworthiness. That of course would include structural integrity under varying types of stress such as sudden strong currents strong winds or high waves. Of course to test a structure without making an exact replica, would be pointless. So those who test make the scaled models as close to the intended or full sized one as possible.

In Japan where earthquake proof buildings are a necessity the scaled down models are subjected to what amounts to equivalent seismic stresses in order to assure that the real one will not collapse. If indeed the test is pointless as you say, why use it?

I'm familiar with the Twin Tower event and subsequent analyzes by engineers.
The Twin Towers were rested and approved for normal stresses and heat variations. They were not tested for jumbo jet impact and the kind of heat generated. However that doesn't mean the engineers were ignorant about the limits of the materials used. They simply assumed those limits would not be exceeded.

Last edited by Radrook; 29th April 2010 at 12:10 AM.
Radrook is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 12:05 AM   #329
Radrook
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,834
Originally Posted by Zep View Post
Just one thing...this was an IRON ship. NOT WOOD.

I now suspect you don't bother to read your own references, let alone any we give you.
I read the article--OK? I assumed identical material was used.

BTW
I don't like to be the target of constant false accusations as I assume you don't either.

Last edited by Radrook; 29th April 2010 at 12:06 AM.
Radrook is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 12:08 AM   #330
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 38,137
Interesting that the SS Great Britain is conveniently deemed to be "almost" the same dimensions as the bible ascribes to Teh Ark. Anyone been to Bristol? She's a lovely ship, especially considering how ugly the later (early generation) steamships would be.


Here's a model.... Who wants to guess which tall thin sticky-uppy elements pictured below the author left off when he said "almost" the same dimension. But that wouldn't matter. I mean sails and masts and funnels have no weight or mass and certainly don't offer a profile to the wind. Or, do they?



__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 12:10 AM   #331
TimCallahan
Philosopher
 
TimCallahan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,293
Here's a thorough, if indirect, pass / fail test for the story of Noah's ark:

Since all land life, or at least all land fauna, would have dispersed from Mr. Ararat, or at least the mountains of Ararat (i. e. Urartu, the Hurrian kingdom that eventually became what is now Armenia), then patterns of genetic drift for a variety of animal types, such as, say, the great cats or the cat family in general, whose genomes could be recorded, should show the same pattern of genetic drift, all leading back to the region of Ararat. Show that consistent pattern across the globe and you will have gone a long way toward proving the truth of the dispersal of land life from the ark's resting place in the mountains of Ararat.

However, the question I would put to Radrock and 154 is this: Will you accept the story of the dispersal of all land fauna from the ark in Ararat disproven if such patterns of genetic drift fail to materialize? If not, why not?

Of course you would still have to explain how it was that. starting in Armenia, the marsupials, with the exception of the opossum, all ended up in Australia, with none left on places like Madagascar or anywhere in the Eurasian continent. That pattern of genetic drift alone will be a problem.
TimCallahan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 12:14 AM   #332
kerikiwi
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,175
Originally Posted by Radrook View Post
BTW
I don't like to be the target of constant false accusations as I assume you don't either.
Nobody does.
Where have you been falsely accused?
kerikiwi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 12:15 AM   #333
JoeyDonuts
Frequencies Not Known To Normals
 
JoeyDonuts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 10,536
Originally Posted by Radrook View Post
I don't like to be the target of constant false accusations as I assume you don't either.
He suspected that you didn't, which is a lot different than accusing you of not.

I take it you're not very good at Clue.

BTW, this is what most Fundamentalists are talking about when they whinge about the "persecution of the faithful."
__________________
EXIT STAGE LEFT! EXIT STAGE RIGHT! THERE IS NO PLACE TO RUN; ALL THE FUSES IN THE EXIT SIGNS HAVE BEEN BURNED OUT!

Last edited by JoeyDonuts; 29th April 2010 at 12:17 AM.
JoeyDonuts is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 12:20 AM   #334
JoeyDonuts
Frequencies Not Known To Normals
 
JoeyDonuts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 10,536
Originally Posted by Radrook View Post
.My response was to the objection that nothing about seaworthiness could be known ...

<snip> ham-fisted clumsy rationalizing </snip>...
You still haven't told us where one would even begin making a model of the Ark, since we don't know what building techniques or structural design was used.

By the way, I'm sure you probably sound a lot smarter to other Christians.
__________________
EXIT STAGE LEFT! EXIT STAGE RIGHT! THERE IS NO PLACE TO RUN; ALL THE FUSES IN THE EXIT SIGNS HAVE BEEN BURNED OUT!

Last edited by JoeyDonuts; 29th April 2010 at 12:21 AM.
JoeyDonuts is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 12:40 AM   #335
Zep
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,699
Originally Posted by Radrook View Post
I read the article--OK? I assumed identical material was used.

BTW
I don't like to be the target of constant false accusations as I assume you don't either.
You give an awful lot of evidence that leads to the one conclusion.

Here's the thing: You referenced the Great Britain as an example of a ship the same size as the ark (and let's not even test the size aspect yet). Why? Supposedly because it was made of wood and it worked, ergo the ark being reputedly made of wood also could have been similarly feasible/seaworthy.

The problem was that you failed to do your homework. 0.2 seconds on Google and Wikipedia and 10 seconds of reading would have revealed Great Britain was an iron ship - one of the first of its type. Iron is not wood, they do not have similar materials properties at all, and the shipbuilding techniques of the two materials are significantly different. This doesn't take rocket surgery to appreciate.

Consequently your post was not only irrelevant, it showed clearly your failure to do your own research.

I can only assume that most of the other "supporting evidence" for any of your points is similarly unresearched and merely "faith-driven". I could be wrong, but that's the story as I see it so far.

Incidentally, here is the list of the biggest wooden ships: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...t_wooden_ships
Zep is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 12:55 AM   #336
PBTree
Muse
 
PBTree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 521
No need for carbon dating, just a DNA test on the wood..It will be easy to prove.

Using the suggested 40000 animals, let say on average they do 2 ounces of poo per day each, thats 80000 ounces or about 2 and a quarter tons of poo per day in the bottom of that "ark".
Don't know how anyone could get rid of that much poo on a daily basis for a year but it surely would have soaked into the wood. Test the wood for poo, if you can find poo from any animal other than something that is or was local (platypus, alpaca ?), I will open my eyes a bit wider.
Whole place would have smelt like a two-hole toilet in the outback.

Suggest the only poo they will find, will be from the well known Bull.

Plus, the statement that the wood is in great condition, would mean that lots and lots and lots and lots of hair will still be there. Possibly another DNA test subject.
__________________
.
So the gods gave us Leprosy because.......?
PBTree is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 12:57 AM   #337
JoeyDonuts
Frequencies Not Known To Normals
 
JoeyDonuts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 10,536
There's several warehouses' full of reason's why the Ark legend is ridiculous.

Start with this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hogging_and_sagging

Of course, if you just want to say the the tale is an allegory - I'd probably have a lot more respect. At least you'd be intellectually honest in that case rather than jumping up and down pretending to be a scientist.
__________________
EXIT STAGE LEFT! EXIT STAGE RIGHT! THERE IS NO PLACE TO RUN; ALL THE FUSES IN THE EXIT SIGNS HAVE BEEN BURNED OUT!
JoeyDonuts is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 01:03 AM   #338
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 38,137
Originally Posted by PBTree View Post
No need for carbon dating, just a DNA test on the wood..It will be easy to prove.

Using the suggested 40000 animals, let say on average they do 2 ounces of poo per day each, thats 80000 ounces or about 2 and a quarter tons of poo per day in the bottom of that "ark".
Don't know how anyone could get rid of that much poo on a daily basis for a year but it surely would have soaked into the wood. Test the wood for poo, if you can find poo from any animal other than something that is or was local (platypus, alpaca ?), I will open my eyes a bit wider.
Whole place would have smelt like a two-hole toilet in the outback.

Suggest the only poo they will find, will be from the well known Bull.

Plus, the statement that the wood is in great condition, would mean that lots and lots and lots and lots of hair will still be there. Possibly another DNA test subject.
Silly skeptic! He had a breeding pair of every creature on earth. That included the dung beetles! I figure roughly 1000 offspring every 20 days - roughly 18,000 dung beetles a year - that's a little under 87 million dung beetles that originated in that area. What'd they eat? That's right. All the poo!

OTOH, When a mommy termite and a daddy termite love each other very much..... (Fast Forward to End >>>>>) Presto! No wood!
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 01:04 AM   #339
timhau
NWO Litter Technician
 
timhau's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Looks like Finland. Smells like Finland. Quacks like Finland. Where the hell am I?
Posts: 12,658
Originally Posted by Radrook View Post
Interestingly, British civil and mechanical engineer Isambard Kingdom Brunel built a steamship (the Great Britain) in 1843 that had almost the same proportions as the Ark, although it was smaller.
In 2007 a company called Airbus built a jet airliner that was also mighty big.

Oh, the relevance to Noah's Ark, you ask? Same as Brunel's steamship. Zero.
__________________
When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord, in his wisdom, doesn't work that way. I just stole one and asked Him to forgive me.
- Emo Philips
timhau is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 01:08 AM   #340
PBTree
Muse
 
PBTree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 521
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
Silly skeptic! He had a breeding pair of every creature on earth. That included the dung beetles! I figure roughly 1000 offspring every 20 days - roughly 18,000 dung beetles a year - that's a little under 87 million dung beetles that originated in that area. What'd they eat? That's right. All the poo!

OTOH, When a mommy termite and a daddy termite love each other very much..... (Fast Forward to End >>>>>) Presto! No wood!


Where is the dung beetle poo, or were they constipated? What goes in, has to come out eventually.
__________________
.
So the gods gave us Leprosy because.......?
PBTree is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 04:31 AM   #341
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 17,790
Originally Posted by 154 View Post
Are you serious? Are you blind? Look at almost every response to me.

None of the posts have been removed.
I think you would find that if you put Complexity on ignore, the level of hostility you perceive would drop by an order of magnitude.

It's not that I'm saying there is no hostility. I've experienced it myself. I'm occasionally known around here as a local religious apologist. I'm not religious, but I think religion is not a bad thing, and certainly not responsible for all the world's evil. Expressing that opinion draws the ire of some, and some of it gets rather nasty. During that interaction, it can seem as if JREF is filled with a horde of nasty, vicious people. In reality, what is happening is that the personal attacks of a few are masking the intelligent conversation of the many.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 04:44 AM   #342
Pup
Philosopher
 
Pup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,679
Originally Posted by Schrodinger's Cat View Post
And you would need each specific food for each animal and MANY animals can only eat a specific kind of food, like koalas with eucalyptice, as someone pointed out. And then with the carnivores, You would need to keep animals to feed them, and food to feed THOSE animals.And remember you'd need to keep all the freshwater fish on the ark too, how were they stored? What about bugs? Each bug would have it's own individual compartment. Think of how
Many bugs there are. And some of THOSE bugs are carnivorous, so you'd need to keep bugs to feed other bugs.
Not to mention passenger pigeons, who won't breed unless they're in large flocks.

And the problem that each pair would need to survive to a successful breeding after being released--despite the fact that their predators were being released nearby. What did the carnivores eat until the prey worked up to the point of having excess offspring?

I read the link that was provided in answer to this, and it still doesn't answer the other question that's always puzzled me (besides how Noah made the grand tour to pick up all the animals from kangaroos to polar bears)--what about the bacteria?

How did he transport smallpox and syphillis and cholera all the obscure germs that need specific hosts among various species?

I just don't see how anyone can put more than a minute's thought into the story and still believe it.
Pup is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 04:49 AM   #343
Skwinty
Philosopher
 
Skwinty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,593
Originally Posted by Pup View Post
How did he transport smallpox and syphillis and cholera all the obscure germs that need specific hosts among various species?

Um, Noah and his offspring were already infected??
__________________


What is reality? Nothing but a collective hunch.
--Lily Tomlin
Skwinty is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 05:39 AM   #344
kedo1981
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,552
As I’ve pointed out before the Noah flood myth is a complete slap in the face to Christian belief.
If you are an adult who clings to such fairy tales you are an idiot.
If you find it appealing to worship a god that would commit such acts of prejudging and murder then you need to seek a mental health professional right away, you are probably a psychopath, and should be locked up.
kedo1981 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 05:58 AM   #345
KSskeptic
Scholar
 
KSskeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 87
This guy thinks it's a fraud

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Globa...ound-in-Turkey

A group of Kurdish workers “are said to have planted large wood beams taken from an old structure in the Black Sea area (where the photos were originally taken) at the Mt. Ararat site. … During the summer of 2009 more wood was planted inside a cave at the site. The Chinese team went in the late summer of 2009 (I was there at the time and knew about the hoax) and was shown the cave with the wood and made their film,”
KSskeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 06:38 AM   #346
Radrook
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,834
Originally Posted by timhau View Post
In 2007 a company called Airbus built a jet airliner that was also mighty big.

Oh, the relevance to Noah's Ark, you ask? Same as Brunel's steamship. Zero.

The relevance is-as I understand it-in choosing the same dimensional ratios as the ark. The author is referring to the seaworethiness.

BTW
Is your incomprehension genuine? Sorry for my doubt but I've never encountered this type of phenomenon before.

Last edited by Radrook; 29th April 2010 at 06:42 AM.
Radrook is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 06:43 AM   #347
Cainkane1
Philosopher
 
Cainkane1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: The great American southeast
Posts: 8,473
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
I think you would find that if you put Complexity on ignore, the level of hostility you perceive would drop by an order of magnitude.

It's not that I'm saying there is no hostility. I've experienced it myself. I'm occasionally known around here as a local religious apologist. I'm not religious, but I think religion is not a bad thing, and certainly not responsible for all the world's evil. Expressing that opinion draws the ire of some, and some of it gets rather nasty. During that interaction, it can seem as if JREF is filled with a horde of nasty, vicious people. In reality, what is happening is that the personal attacks of a few are masking the intelligent conversation of the many.
Religion may not be responsible for all the worlds evils but the problems caused by religion are great. The world would be better off without it. Not perfect but better off.
__________________
If at first you don't succeed try try again. Then if you fail to succeed to Hell with that. Try something else.
Cainkane1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 06:48 AM   #348
Radrook
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,834
Originally Posted by kedo1981 View Post
As I’ve pointed out before the Noah flood myth is a complete slap in the face to Christian belief.
If you are an adult who clings to such fairy tales you are an idiot.
If you find it appealing to worship a god that would commit such acts of prejudging and murder then you need to seek a mental health professional right away, you are probably a psychopath, and should be locked up.
Psychopath?--Idiot?

You really are unaware that name-calling comes under the category of fallacious reasoning and that its use is indicative of person doesn't have leg to stand on? Are you also aware that it's against forum rules and you can be banned for it?

Last edited by Radrook; 29th April 2010 at 06:50 AM.
Radrook is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 06:55 AM   #349
Radrook
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,834
Originally Posted by PBTree View Post
No need for carbon dating, just a DNA test on the wood..It will be easy to prove.

Using the suggested 40000 animals, let say on average they do 2 ounces of poo per day each, thats 80000 ounces or about 2 and a quarter tons of poo per day in the bottom of that "ark".
Don't know how anyone could get rid of that much poo on a daily basis for a year but it surely would have soaked into the wood. Test the wood for poo, if you can find poo from any animal other than something that is or was local (platypus, alpaca ?), I will open my eyes a bit wider.
Whole place would have smelt like a two-hole toilet in the outback.

Suggest the only poo they will find, will be from the well known Bull.

Plus, the statement that the wood is in great condition, would mean that lots and lots and lots and lots of hair will still be there. Possibly another DNA test subject.
You know what I'm really looking for? I'm looking for detailed relevant responses to the explanations provided for the livability of the ark. You know, like the ventilation solution. Anyone want to refute the solution that was provided? Now that would be interesting to read and not this constant monotonous prmieval mindleess and endless chanting.



Noah's Ark Feasabilty Study
http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=...on=view&ID=402

Last edited by Radrook; 29th April 2010 at 07:06 AM.
Radrook is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 07:11 AM   #350
Radrook
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,834
Originally Posted by kerikiwi View Post
Nobody does.
Where have you been falsely accused?

I never once said that the two ships were the same material. Actually, neither did the author of the article.
Radrook is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 07:13 AM   #351
Marduk
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,183
Originally Posted by Radrook View Post
You know what I'm really looking for? I'm looking for detailed relevant responses to the explanations provided for the livability of the ark. You know, like the ventilation solution. Anyone want to refute the solution that was provided? Now that would be interesting to read and not this constant monotonous prmieval mindleess and endless chanting.



Noah's Ark Feasabilty Study
http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=...on=view&ID=402
The earlier texts describing the Ark, have it a much more believable size
have you read them ?
Marduk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 07:14 AM   #352
Radrook
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,834
Originally Posted by TimCallahan View Post
Here's a thorough, if indirect, pass / fail test for the story of Noah's ark:

Since all land life, or at least all land fauna, would have dispersed from Mr. Ararat, or at least the mountains of Ararat (i. e. Urartu, the Hurrian kingdom that eventually became what is now Armenia), then patterns of genetic drift for a variety of animal types, such as, say, the great cats or the cat family in general, whose genomes could be recorded, should show the same pattern of genetic drift, all leading back to the region of Ararat. Show that consistent pattern across the globe and you will have gone a long way toward proving the truth of the dispersal of land life from the ark's resting place in the mountains of Ararat.

However, the question I would put to Radrock and 154 is this: Will you accept the story of the dispersal of all land fauna from the ark in Ararat disproven if such patterns of genetic drift fail to materialize? If not, why not?

Of course you would still have to explain how it was that. starting in Armenia, the marsupials, with the exception of the opossum, all ended up in Australia, with none left on places like Madagascar or anywhere in the Eurasian continent. That pattern of genetic drift alone will be a problem.

My belief in an ID doesn't depend on biblical veracity.
Radrook is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 07:15 AM   #353
Marduk
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,183
Originally Posted by Radrook View Post
My belief in an ID doesn't depend on biblical veracity.
so your belief in ID doesn't include the God of the bible then ?
Marduk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 07:16 AM   #354
Radrook
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,834
Originally Posted by Cainkane1 View Post
Religion may not be responsible for all the worlds evils but the problems caused by religion are great. The world would be better off without it. Not perfect but better off.
Less is more as the saying goes.
Radrook is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 07:38 AM   #355
Michael Redman
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 3,063
Originally Posted by Radrook View Post
You know what I'm really looking for? I'm looking for detailed relevant responses to the explanations provided for the livability of the ark. You know, like the ventilation solution. Anyone want to refute the solution that was provided? Now that would be interesting to read and not this constant monotonous prmieval mindleess and endless chanting.



Noah's Ark Feasabilty Study
http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=...on=view&ID=402
Solution provided where? Your link provides no solutions, only broad conclusions.
Michael Redman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 07:41 AM   #356
dio
Thinker
 
dio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 232
Originally Posted by Radrook View Post
My belief in an ID doesn't depend on biblical veracity.
So why in the world do you keep pushing this flooder nonsense?

And to confirm your above statement, here, repeat after me:

The biblical flood is a myth. It didn't happen.
dio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 07:46 AM   #357
Pup
Philosopher
 
Pup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,679
Originally Posted by Radrook View Post
You know what I'm really looking for? I'm looking for detailed relevant responses to the explanations provided for the livability of the ark. You know, like the ventilation solution. Anyone want to refute the solution that was provided? Now that would be interesting to read and not this constant monotonous prmieval mindleess and endless chanting.

Noah's Ark Feasabilty Study
http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=...on=view&ID=402
What about my post #342?

Many of the objections are ones that sites don't choose to address at all.

How do you get passenger pigeons to breed when there are only two (or even a dozen)?

How do you keep it cold enough for the polar bears and warm enough for the tropical animals?

How do you pick up the polar bears and the tropical animals in time?

Do you bring additional sick animals to host the different species of bacteria and parasites and if so, how do you keep those animals from infecting the others?
Pup is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 07:51 AM   #358
Radrook
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,834
Originally Posted by Michael Redman View Post
Solution provided where? Your link provides no solutions, only broad conclusions.
Broad conclusions based on nothing! Really? Astounding!
Radrook is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 07:56 AM   #359
Radrook
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,834
Originally Posted by Pup View Post
What about my post #342?

Many of the objections are ones that sites don't choose to address at all.

How do you get passenger pigeons to breed when there are only two (or even a dozen)?

How do you keep it cold enough for the polar bears and warm enough for the tropical animals?

How do you pick up the polar bears and the tropical animals in time?

Do you bring additional sick animals to host the different species of bacteria and parasites and if so, how do you keep those animals from infecting the others?


I'm referring to going to a website. Reading one of the counterarguments and then attempting a rebuttal. THat's far more interesting than having to read the "HA! H! HA! they are wrong!" comments which require no deep thought whatsoever.
Radrook is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th April 2010, 07:59 AM   #360
Pup
Philosopher
 
Pup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,679
Originally Posted by Radrook View Post
I'm referring to going to a website. Reading one of the counterarguments and then attempting a rebuttal. THat's far more interesting than having to read the "HA! H! HA! they are wrong!" comments which require no deep thought whatsoever.
So show me a website where the questions I asked are addressed. I can't rebut an argument that I haven't seen presented.
Pup is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:14 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.