The Greatest Artifact in the History of Mankind

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2004-01-01 12:34pm

I saw a History Channel special on Noah's Ark (followed closely by a History channel special on "Bible Codes", so only God knows what idiots are running the channel), and they produced "mysterious images" taken by the CIA that 'proved' the existance of Noah's Ark.

They had to outline the Ark-shape in red, and even then it looked like a rectangle. Not very convincing evidence.

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2004-01-01 02:55pm

Rob Wilson wrote: She used metal to support the load and the Plates helped to prevent torsion.

Really? What metal was used to support what part of the load, and how do iron plates bolted to a wooden structure help prevent torsion?

Crayz9000 · Post by **Crayz9000** » 2004-01-01 03:31pm

Frank Hipper wrote:
Rob Wilson wrote: She used metal to support the load and the Plates helped to prevent torsion.
Really? What metal was used to support what part of the load, and how do iron plates bolted to a wooden structure help prevent torsion?

Because wood cannot hold as many pounds per square inch as iron, the iron serves to spread the weight of the load across the wooden structure. It also stiffens the structure, preventing it from being flexed (that's the torsion problem).

The Aliens · Post by **The Aliens** » 2004-01-01 04:25pm

Crayz9000 wrote:
Frank Hipper wrote:
Rob Wilson wrote: She used metal to support the load and the Plates helped to prevent torsion.
Really? What metal was used to support what part of the load, and how do iron plates bolted to a wooden structure help prevent torsion?
Because wood cannot hold as many pounds per square inch as iron, the iron serves to spread the weight of the load across the wooden structure. It also stiffens the structure, preventing it from being flexed (that's the torsion problem).

How is it attached? They'll have fun using rivets on a mostly wooden boat. The torsion will eventually start pulling the metal off, unless its very securly fastened (ie. welded).

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2004-01-01 05:45pm

Crayz9000 wrote:Because wood cannot hold as many pounds per square inch as iron, the iron serves to spread the weight of the load across the wooden structure. It also stiffens the structure, preventing it from being flexed (that's the torsion problem).

But when you're bolting iron plates to wood, without the iron being a structural component, it increases the load the wood is carrying.
If anything, the weight of the iron weakened the structure, rather than reinforced it.

Post by **Rob Wilson** » 2004-01-01 08:03pm

Frank Hipper wrote:
Crayz9000 wrote:Because wood cannot hold as many pounds per square inch as iron, the iron serves to spread the weight of the load across the wooden structure. It also stiffens the structure, preventing it from being flexed (that's the torsion problem).
But when you're bolting iron plates to wood, without the iron being a structural component, it increases the load the wood is carrying.
If anything, the weight of the iron weakened the structure, rather than reinforced it.

If I remember correctly (and this is naval info from my memory so check it out

), but an Iron framework was put around the hull and the plates attached to that. This supported the load, allowed the ship to be lengthened and also prevented the torsion from snapping the main spans. I thik that the wooden hull allowed them to help rpevent the Iron from twisting out of shape and the Iron helped the Wood from being snapped like a twig.

There's bound to be somewhere with indepth info on the subject.

Post by **Rob Wilson** » 2004-01-01 08:11pm

HemlockGrey wrote:I saw a History Channel special on Noah's Ark (followed closely by a History channel special on "Bible Codes", so only God knows what idiots are running the channel), and they produced "mysterious images" taken by the CIA that 'proved' the existance of Noah's Ark.

They had to outline the Ark-shape in red, and even then it looked like a rectangle. Not very convincing evidence.

Was this the special that turned out to be a hoax? The Guy claiming to find it in Ararat, George Jammal, had never even been to Turkey and he's peice of the Ark was a railway sleeper or something. He'd done the whole thing to prove how gullible Creationists were (and tv networks - CBS I think)

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2004-01-01 08:22pm

StarshipTitanic wrote:
The Aliens wrote:
CaptainChewbacca wrote:The rail-car from WWI and WWII also has had a lot of influence.
Thatw as just sort of an aside, Treaty of Versailles fits the bill of bridging the two WWs better IMHO.

EDIT: Messed-up quote.
The railcar was blown up in Berlin, anyway.

On this line of thought the Hall of Mirrors at the Palace of Versailles would be a candidate. In it both the treaty which ended the Franco Prussian war, which went a long way to set up WW1, and the Treaty which ended WW1 where negotiated.

Lt. Dan · Post by **Lt. Dan** » 2004-01-01 11:59pm

For one thing, I'm taking this on faith.
"...and on the seventeenth day of the seventh month month the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat." Genesis 8:4

Now, how many mountains are there called Ararat? And those pics, we know the ark wouldn't have been small and those pics show a very large something...

Now, as for the whole dinosaur thing I talk about, my point was how can we have a color picked out for an animal we have never seen before and everyone thinks it must be true while just because it was on T.V. but no one believes a giant ship that is still there even though there are pics? Is it just because the story comes from the Bible? Well the Bible said it was there and so somebody decided to take a pic and wow, look at that there is something there that resembles a giant ship.

For the fresh water thing, rain is fresh water. And the food? I don't know I wasn't there. I don't know how and I really don't care to tell you the truth. Noah's Ark wasn't the point of my first post, go back read it again.

The Cleric · Post by **The Cleric** » 2004-01-02 12:03am

Fishing. I assume that the fish didn't drown in the flood.

Lt. Dan · Post by **Lt. Dan** » 2004-01-02 12:21am

Good point StormTrooper

My dad brang up another good point about the food. Don't animals hibernate? Who's to say that God wouldn't have slowed down the animal's metabolism.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2004-01-02 12:31am

Um, if there was a massive flood that wiped out all life a few thousand years ago, how did humans repopulate the Americas, and how come all evidence shows human life originating in Africa, not Armenia?

Lt. Dan · Post by **Lt. Dan** » 2004-01-02 12:39am

I don't know but maybe the Earth is the way it is because of the flood more or less. When the Earth was repopulated they moved across the small land mass conecting N. America and Asia. We know that the Earth has giant changes and the waters rise and fall. As for the Africa thing I don't know, I haven't really read or seen anything for a couple years so I'm not going to touch that. The last thing I saw was the "Real Eve" on the Discovery Channel a few years back.

StarshipTitanic · Post by **StarshipTitanic** » 2004-01-02 02:01am

Lt. Dan wrote:I don't know but maybe the Earth is the way it is because of the flood more or less. When the Earth was repopulated they moved across the small land mass conecting N. America and Asia. We know that the Earth has giant changes and the waters rise and fall. As for the Africa thing I don't know, I haven't really read or seen anything for a couple years so I'm not going to touch that. The last thing I saw was the "Real Eve" on the Discovery Channel a few years back.

Yeah, the flood changed the world so much it happened to erase all evidence of itself.

Somehow the idea of a bunch of inbred Jews giving birth to the ethnic groups that would later oppress them is ironic.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2004-01-02 02:54am

Just an FYI, Noah brought five of every unclean and seven of every clean animal on the ark, for population and to sacrifice two of each clean animal when they landed.

Lt. Dan · Post by **Lt. Dan** » 2004-01-02 02:55am

StarshipTitanic wrote:
Lt. Dan wrote:I don't know but maybe the Earth is the way it is because of the flood more or less. When the Earth was repopulated they moved across the small land mass conecting N. America and Asia. We know that the Earth has giant changes and the waters rise and fall. As for the Africa thing I don't know, I haven't really read or seen anything for a couple years so I'm not going to touch that. The last thing I saw was the "Real Eve" on the Discovery Channel a few years back.
Yeah, the flood changed the world so much it happened to erase all evidence of itself.

Somehow the idea of a bunch of inbred Jews giving birth to the ethnic groups that would later oppress them is ironic.

Well it's either that or your a desendent of a bunch of inbred africans. And have you seen what water can do? It is damn powerful. It carves out canyons out of solid rock does it not?

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2004-01-02 03:59am

Rob Wilson wrote:There's bound to be somewhere with indepth info on the subject.

I haven't found any yet.

On Dunderberg, there's only mention of where she was built, when, and the specs I posted when I brought her up, along with mention of her collision bulkhead, watertight compartments, and engines. No mention of iron construction anywhere.
Several repeated mentions of her being the longest wooden ship ever built, however.

Lt. Dan wrote:Well it's either that or your a desendent of a bunch of inbred africans. And have you seen what water can do? It is damn powerful. It carves out canyons out of solid rock does it not?

Of course water carves canyons out of solid rock, OVER MILLIONS OF YEARS!

If you're talking about the Grand Canyon, would you care to describe how there are a multitude of twists and turns in it, if it was made in a short
period of time by a single event and a huge volume of rushing water?

StormTrooperTR889 wrote:Fishing. I assume that the fish didn't drown in the flood.

Ever try changing the salinity of a saltwater aquarium? Saltwater fish don't survive for long in water that hasn't been carefully prepared for them. Lower the saline levels just a little bit, and they go belly up.
Freshwater fish have very low tolerances for added salt, as well.
Drowning doesn't come into this, the brackish mix that a global flood would have produced would have killed off most fish that couldn't tolerate the change in water chemistry.

Crayz9000 · Post by **Crayz9000** » 2004-01-02 04:07am

More than likely, it was simply an exaggeration of a localized event in the Mediterranean, possibly due to melting glaciers/snowpacks/whatever somewhere. Some nomad (Noah) decided to build a small ship just in case of a flood, and put enough room on it for his livestock and family. Eventually it starts raining hard enough to make a flood on the Jordan, and this guy loads up the boat and weathers the flood out.

Nothing that we haven't seen before.

So the flood dries up, the boat gets grounded, Noah rebuilds and gets drunk, etc. Eventually, enough years pass that the legend gets twisted (we're talking maybe a few hundred years here). Things get exaggerated, blown out of proportion. A hilltop becomes Mt. Ararat. Some livestock becomes a half-dozen of every creature known. And the flood, probably confined to the Jordan river valley, becomes an event that affects the world.

Now I'm sure that there are people who'd burn me at the stake for that, but come on. There is no other realistic way this thing could have happened.

Robert Treder · Post by **Robert Treder** » 2004-01-02 06:13am

This shouldn't be necessary (because there shouldn't be people left on Earth dumb enough to think that the "global flood" would work), but there's no need to even discuss the flood: It's all been done before.

Post by **Rob Wilson** » 2004-01-02 01:50pm

Robert Treder wrote:This shouldn't be necessary (because there shouldn't be people left on Earth dumb enough to think that the "global flood" would work), but there's no need to even discuss the flood: It's all been done before.

Quite true, but to just deal with three specific points raised by Dan not immediately answered in the FAQ.

1. Not everything eats fish (the huge number of Vegetarian species for Example). Vegetable matter goes bad very quickly in humid, dark conditions.

2. Hibernation is a condition only achievable by small handful of creatures, and with the exception of the Bear, they are all small. You still have the large land mammals to feed, water and clean up after.

3. it would have to rain everyday to ensure a clean water supply (Fresh water soon stagnates in dark, still containment, especially in large volumes). The Bible says it rained only for 40 days and 40 nights, well a month later you have no potable water left, only stagnant, disease-enabling water. One month after that it's a viral breeding ground. So for your elephants alone the Ark must be underneath 200 gallons of rainwater everyday - that's a lot of rain!

Of course you could always say "God did it." But then that's abandonning science and logic completely, so losing any debate by default. Sorry.

Robert Treder · Post by **Robert Treder** » 2004-01-02 03:21pm

Rob Wilson wrote:3. it would have to rain everyday to ensure a clean water supply (Fresh water soon stagnates in dark, still containment, especially in large volumes). The Bible says it rained only for 40 days and 40 nights, well a month later you have no potable water left, only stagnant, disease-enabling water. One month after that it's a viral breeding ground. So for your elephants alone the Ark must be underneath 200 gallons of rainwater everyday - that's a lot of rain!

Additionally, if the flood was indeed global, they wouldn't be sailing (floating? did the Ark have sails?) on fresh water, because the flood waters would by necessity mix with the ocean. Which is salty, for those of you who haven't been.

Post by **Rob Wilson** » 2004-01-02 04:35pm

Robert Treder wrote: Additionally, if the flood was indeed global, they wouldn't be sailing (floating? did the Ark have sails?) on fresh water, because the flood waters would by necessity mix with the ocean. Which is salty, for those of you who haven't been.

That's actually covered in the FAQ and in the previous responses too, so I left it. But the rain cycle would have to be of the scales for the necessary fresh water requirements - Evaporation rates would be so high that the humidity would be near 100%, you'd kill a huge number of the animals in the ark through overheating. Not to mention that much evaporation would cause the salt levels in the surface layers of the ocean to be higher, and make the silt from the land even thicker, only deep water fish would have a hope of survival (hope none of them were evil

), PLankton and Krill would vanish so Filter feeders would starve and the bottom of the food chain would disintegrate... bit of a bugger really.

The Cleric · Post by **The Cleric** » 2004-01-02 04:45pm

God used his magic and saved them all. The End.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2004-01-02 04:50pm

also, if it was global, what the hell happened to all the water? that much water covering every single part of the surface of the earth would be incredibly huge in volume. which i'd imagine would take a goodly number of centuries to evaporate completely. and even then where would it all go to? more importantly, where did it all come from? that much water just doesn't come out of nowhere. . . .

Post by **NecronLord** » 2004-01-02 05:37pm

Darth Wong wrote:Ten thousand years from now, that moon plaque will still be there. You can't say that about too many other things we've made.

Hopefully preserved in place under a large museum.