If this is the true Noah's Ark, how will it change modern perspectives of the bible?
|
4
points
Noah's Ark is impossible. First, one would have to be insane to believe this myth. second, On the same topic, there's a listing here of what the Dallas Zoo requires on a daily basis, to feed the animals. If you go by the literal definition of the ark's cargo there were millions of animals on it. Obviously that's because the people who invented the ark legend didn't know anything about the animal kingdom and the huge variety of creatures in it, so didn't realize how absurd the idea was. But reality aside, if you say there was just one representative pair of animals of each species, and that super fast reproduction and evolution/mutation enabled one type of beetle to turn into the hundreds of thousands of types we see today, you could say that there was a manageable number of animals on the ark. So less than the Dallas Zoo, but still thousands of creatures. Here's what the Dallas zoo needs every single day. A ton of hay 35 pounds of fish 50 pounds of meat 100 stalks of celery five pounds of red onions 100 pounds of carrots 25 pounds of spinach 15 pounds of kale 10 pounds of mixed vegetables 150 pounds of sweet potatoes 10 heads of cabbage 48 heads of romaine 30 ears of corn four loaves of wheat bread 24 eggs a pound of yogurt 40 pounds of bananas eight pounds of blueberries 170 oranges 500 apples 36 cantaloupes four papayas 250 rodents (the variety pack) 6000 mealworms 600 wax worms 7500 crickets Remember, it rained for 40 days/nights, and then they had to wait around for the water to drain away (again, where did it go?) for some more weeks. This list of food is what the Dallas Zoo needs every day. Multiply this by 50 or 60 days... Say that Noah only needed half a ton of hay a day. That's 30 tons of hay for the whole cruise. Exactly where did they keep this? How did they gather it all in advance of the rain? If you gathered 100 pounds of hay every day, it would take you 20 days per ton. So you'd have to do nothing but gather hay for 600 days to get 30 tons together. Side: Noah's Ark
1
point
1
point
I believe in the Ark and the Bible. It says that God helped Noah prepare the ark for what was to come. The ark was bigger than anyone can imagine. By the way it was described, it would make Titanic look like a motorcycle setting beside a fighter jet. There are reasons that ships like the Titanic aren't made of wood: past a certain point the wood loses structural integrity. That's why steel is used. Noah's ark is a fable, exaggerated like so many through oral tradition. There was a local flood that covered the area of the ancestors who eventually made the story, but it wasn't worldwide and it couldn't have been. A worldwide flood is firstly impossible, there isn't enough water on earth and it would have to leave somewhere. Secondly it would exterminate all life on the planet, on an ark or not, because the entire ecosystem would die. Side: Mythology
2
points
If Noah's ark ever existed which its is unlikely it did then hypothetically it would change some perspective on the Bible.
That said the idea that it is Noah's ark is anthropopethic, just because you find a bit of boat dating around 5000 years doesn't automatically make it Noah's ark. If I found a slipper dating back 2000 years could it be stated that it belonged to Jesus? Side: Mythology
This is like debating what the impact on fiscal policy would be if we found out leprechauns really were hiding at the ends of rainbows with giant pots of gold. It's not Noah's Ark. There's no such thing. It hasn't been the Ark any of the hundred other times some whackjob claimed to have found it and it's not now. You know when you're a kid, and you start reaching the age where you ask your parents how Santa visits every house in the world in one night while carring all those toys in one big sack and why his reindeers can fly... and you aren't really getting any really satisfactory answers for how Santa is apparently moving at light speed without being incinerated by atmospheric friction? If you haven't reached the same point when dealing with the story about how some guy somehow gathered breeding pairs of all the animals from multiple continents and fit them and all their supplies on a boat about 1000 times too small to hold them then kept them alive on it for a year through a flood there isn't enough water on the face of the planet to create... you have issues. Side: Not Noahs Ark
1
point
There's no such thing. You are making unprovable claims. It hasn't been the Ark any of the hundred other times some whackjob claimed to have found it and it's not now. You will note that the debate title expressly stated 'If this is the true Noah's Ark...' and you aren't really getting any really satisfactory answers for how Santa is apparently moving at light speed without being incinerated by atmospheric friction? You must have been a troubled child. Side: Not Noahs Ark
What I think he's saying is that, given his stated belief that there is no real Noah's ark, the very topic of this debate is a fallacy. It makes the assumption that there IS a real Noah's ark to begin with. The creator has, by very naming of the topic, taken a very definite stance and limited the scope of the debate to total irrelevancy. The only way to get any value out of this particular topic is to overstep the bounds a bit. Side: Not Noahs Ark
You are making unprovable claims. Oh really? Saying a wooden boat that could survive a world-submerging flood that would smash a steel modern worship to twisted metal splinters if it had actually happened, and which would hold two of every animal on earth and enough supplies to feed them for a year despite the fact that the Ark wasn't supposed to be even a small fraction of the size required to do such a thing, and which was supposed to have sailed around in a flood that would have required THIRTY TIMES more water than exists on THE ENTIRE PLANET, doesn't exist... is unprovable? Really? Hey Terminator, I have a full grown humpback whale swimming around in a coffee cup in the palm of my hand. Is it unprovable that I'm making that up too? You will note that the debate title expressly stated 'If this is the true Noah's Ark...' And you will note that my response said IT'S NOT because there's no such thing. Side: Not Noahs Ark
Modern perspectives of the bible itself? Even hypothetically assuming that this ark isn't a fraud (not the case, by the way. It's already been admitted fake - look it up) this would have no effect for either of the camps - believers and non believers. Non-ark-believers already think the entire story is a fake, so hearing yet another announcement that "the REAL one has been found" would have as much effect as me earnestly announcing that I TOTALLY JUST SAW AN ALIEN, FOR REALS THIS TIME. Whereas ark believers already believed that it was the 100% immutable truth, so they required no further proof. Even this one being proven fake has no effect on their world view - they just shrug and say the real one hasn't been found "yet". Side: Not Noahs Ark
1
point
The bible is a book of story's that should help guide a person threw to good times and the bad times. Its a reference book.........the bible is just a STORY!!!! its not a history book, nor will it ever be one!!!!! I'm not saying the bible is bad, but not a god damn history book, just get over it already Side: Not Noahs Ark
1
point
Nope.........all due respect...its like saying, for one moment just pretend lord of the rings really did happen. the group who found this "ark" refuses to let scientist examine any evidence.. along with the conflicting issue that this group was organized to find the ark and would only benefit by its discovery even if fabricated. countless groups have said they found big foot or lock-ness and so on the city of TROY... or Sodom and Gomorrah and not to mention if this is the real ark. whose flood story ark is it? is it the ark from the pagan story of Gilgamesh set in Babylonian times and over 1000 years older then when the bible accounts for Noah. too many facts of history cannot let me suspend my disbelief long enough Side: Not Noahs Ark
This debate is like if someone started asking "If H. floresiensis is a real (non-hoax) fossil set, how will it change modern perspectives on Tolkien's The Hobbit?" http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/ Side: Mythology
|
