Post Reply
Page 1 of 5  •  1 2 3 4 5 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Building an ark in Kentucky
3 years ago  ::  Aug 17, 2011 - 10:15PM #1
MMarcoe
Posts: 14,651
A thread I started a few months ago described how someone is building an ark in Europe. Well, someone from Answers in Genesis is building one in Kentucky now.



New Noah's Ark in Ky. aims to prove truth of Bible


There are a handful of replica arks around the world, but Zovath said this one will be authentic inside and out.


"When you get to walk through the boat and see how big this thing really was, and how many cages were there, and how much room there was for food and water ... our hope is people start seeing that this is plausible, that the account could be believed," Zovath said.

Yah, sure. If you're a typical American. Continued at news.yahoo.com/noahs-ark-ky-aims-prove-t...

There are three sides to every story: your side, my side, and the truth.

God is just a personification of reality, of pure objectivity.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Aug 17, 2011 - 10:57PM #2
d_p_m
Posts: 9,013

Good way to fish in the ignorant and innumerate.


I wonder how many people it will fool?

PHARAOH IRY-HOR, FROM THE 3100s BC, IS THE FIRST HUMAN WHOSE NAME WE KNOW.

-- cool facts from xkcd


"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."

-- Albert Einstein
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Aug 18, 2011 - 12:05AM #3
MMarcoe
Posts: 14,651

Aug 17, 2011 -- 10:57PM, d_p_m wrote:


Good way to fish in the ignorant and innumerate.


I wonder how many people it will fool?





Probably a lot. People will see the many rooms in the ark and say "Aw shucks, Vern, looky here. See? Them evos was wrong. Y'all kin fit all the speceez in tha ark thar!"


Of course, there will be no treatments of the many scientific objections to the ark story.

There are three sides to every story: your side, my side, and the truth.

God is just a personification of reality, of pure objectivity.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Aug 18, 2011 - 8:58AM #4
57
Posts: 20,518

Building an ark will be just one more of many items that show the ark was feasible. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Aug 18, 2011 - 10:10AM #5
EarthScientist
Posts: 3,419

That'd be great and all, but they still have to come up with a  flood that never happened.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Aug 18, 2011 - 11:06AM #6
MMarcoe
Posts: 14,651

I want to know how many "kinds" they are going to fit into this boat.


And I want to know how they will deal with the many arguments against the flood story.

There are three sides to every story: your side, my side, and the truth.

God is just a personification of reality, of pure objectivity.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Aug 18, 2011 - 12:53PM #7
HouseofDavid
Posts: 591

Ah yes, this is the one that will result in a net cost to taxpayers, should the park hit its attendence threshold.  This place leaves me wondering:


1) Would the governor have approved a sales tax rebate if a developer had proposed to build a Wiccan museum ?  How about a Voodoo Museum, or Satan Worship and Hedonism Experience ?  What if these religious-based theme parks could be shown to draw enough visitors - would state government have been willing to subsidize them ?  If not, the state's support of the Ark Encounter is unconstitutional.


2) So Noah had about 2,000 to 4,000 animals to put on the ark.  But there are millions of animal species.  Surely he missed a few, and if so, can't we agree that Genesis is at least inaccurate on that account ?   I bet Noah didn't have a wombat, platypus, or kangaroo.  Funny how the Bible doesn't mention those.  Could it be that Noah didn't even know about Australia?


3) Will the Ark encounter show the ventilation, feeding, and animal waste management systems?  Each of these animals must have at least consumed its own weight and volume during the year afloat, so the Ark better show enough room for that.  If not, the Ark is not "Biblically feasible".   How did 2 adults and 6 kids feed and scoop poop for 4,000 animals a day ?  I have trouble keeping up with 2 cats.


4) Will the park show how its possible for multiple limestone formations, hundred of feet thick with delicate sedimentary structures, separated by other clastic sedimentary formations, to have been deposited during the 371 days of the Biblical flood event ?


5) Wouldn't it be a lot easier just to accept Genesis as something other than literal truth?

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Aug 18, 2011 - 1:13PM #8
Ken
Posts: 33,860

Aug 18, 2011 -- 12:53PM, HouseofDavid wrote:

Will the Ark encounter show the ventilation, feeding, and animal waste management systems?  Each of these animals must have at least consumed its own weight and volume during the year afloat, so the Ark better show enough room for that.  If not, the Ark is not "Biblically feasible".   How did 2 adults and 6 kids feed and scoop poop for 4,000 animals a day ?  I have trouble keeping up with 2 cats.



I think it's safe to say that this thing won't be built using only technology that was available in the third millennium BCE. How could it be without violating more building and safety codes than you can shake a stick at? And, as it's being built in Kentucky, there will obviously be no attempt to prove that it's seaworthy.


The whole project is a sham, and the taxpayers of Kentucky are damned fools for subsidizing it. I hope they get well and truly screwed.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Aug 18, 2011 - 1:59PM #9
d_p_m
Posts: 9,013

Aug 18, 2011 -- 1:13PM, Ken wrote:


Aug 18, 2011 -- 12:53PM, HouseofDavid wrote:

Will the Ark encounter show the ventilation, feeding, and animal waste management systems?  Each of these animals must have at least consumed its own weight and volume during the year afloat, so the Ark better show enough room for that.  If not, the Ark is not "Biblically feasible".   How did 2 adults and 6 kids feed and scoop poop for 4,000 animals a day ?  I have trouble keeping up with 2 cats.



I think it's safe to say that this thing won't be built using only technology that was available in the third millennium BCE. How could it be without violating more building and safety codes than you can shake a stick at? And, as it's being built in Kentucky, there will obviously be no attempt to prove that it's seaworthy.


The whole project is a sham, and the taxpayers of Kentucky are damned fools for subsidizing it. I hope they get well and truly screwed.




And, of course it will not deal with some issues:


1. Having two of every species of animal


2. Having to survive on a global flood for most of a year.


3. Deal with atmospheric contamination and ventilation problems from animal waste.


4. Feeding all those nonexistent animals with a crew of 8.


5. Removing the animal waste with a crew of 8.


6. Storing food for carnivores for 10 months without refrigeration, canning, or similar food preservation techniques.


7. Dealing with the repalcement of the surrounding atmosphere with superheated steam.


8. Building it with one person, no power tools, out of local resources.


9. Collecting the animals from distant continents without modern transportation.


10. Returning the animals to distant continents without modern transportation.


11. Keeping the small animals from escaping.


12. Keeping the large animals for escaping (can you say 'wooden cage for elephants'?).


13. Importing, sorting and storing exotic foods for some species, from distant continents (eucalyptus, koalas).


14. Making a structure strong enough to remain seaworthy, of that size, without ferrous reinforcement.


... and on and on.


This is just a larger version of the 'flood in a jar of mud', and just as scientifically valid.


 


 

PHARAOH IRY-HOR, FROM THE 3100s BC, IS THE FIRST HUMAN WHOSE NAME WE KNOW.

-- cool facts from xkcd


"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."

-- Albert Einstein
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Aug 18, 2011 - 2:01PM #10
d_p_m
Posts: 9,013

Aug 18, 2011 -- 12:53PM, HouseofDavid wrote:


Ah yes, this is the one that will result in a net cost to taxpayers, should the park hit its attendence threshold.  This place leaves me wondering:


1) Would the governor have approved a sales tax rebate if a developer had proposed to build a Wiccan museum ?  How about a Voodoo Museum, or Satan Worship and Hedonism Experience ?  What if these religious-based theme parks could be shown to draw enough visitors - would state government have been willing to subsidize them ?  If not, the state's support of the Ark Encounter is unconstitutional.




Obviously the state government is obligated to financially support all those alternatives and more - Islamic, Hindu, Shinto, Asatru, Druidic... they should get right on that.

PHARAOH IRY-HOR, FROM THE 3100s BC, IS THE FIRST HUMAN WHOSE NAME WE KNOW.

-- cool facts from xkcd


"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."

-- Albert Einstein
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 5  •  1 2 3 4 5 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook