Ohio Chatter
Ohio Chatter

Forums

All Threads Serious Business Sports Politics Archive Pick 'ems
Log In Create Account

Noah's Ark Found?

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Serious Business ▸ Noah's Ark Found?
Fab1b's avatar

Fab1b

The Bald A-Hole!!

12,949 posts
Apr 28, 2010 1:03 PM
buckeyefalls wrote: Questions (while I don't believe that this may be the real "ark"):

1. If it were, and they found proof, would this cause you skeptics to start believing in the Bible or would you make up excuses as to why it didn't belong to Christianity, but rather to other religions of the past?

2. If it were discovered by atheists and they could find that the dimensions matched Noah's ark of the Scripture, etc. and other similarities, what would it take for you to believe that the story was true and that maybe the Bible needs to be trusted a little more?

Not trying to be sarcastic, but I'm a firm believer that what Scripture teaches about the lost demanding physical signs that Jesus existed wouldn't matter because even when they are before your very eyes, you still deny.
I don't believe the bible to be word of "god" but story by man. I do believe pieces of the bible to be true and historical but because man himself witnessed an event. Take Noah for example. He could have built a boat to escape possible flooding in his region and took a few animals with him but of course the bible's version is much better as the story grew. Just my 2 cents.
Apr 28, 2010 1:03pm
J

jmog

Senior Member

6,567 posts
Apr 28, 2010 1:07 PM
ManO'War wrote: LOL @ jmog trying to explain away a fable.
LOL at MOW for acting like he knows everything once again.

I was just explaining what the belief/story is according to the Bible, I wasn't giving any scientific evidences/proofs of it, so try again.
Apr 28, 2010 1:07pm
M

matdad

Senior Member

146 posts
Apr 28, 2010 1:07 PM
A few interesting "facts" about the ark finding:

1) There are no forests within 300 miles of Mt. Ararat.
2) Every single animal has a single ancestor. Of the 300+ species of canines they can all be traced back to a single ancestor.
3) The ark, according to Biblical accounts, was 450' long and 75' wide and 4.5 stories tall. It could have contained over 175 railroad box cars.
4) Some scietnists claim that the "flood" explains why dinosaurs all died at the same time and why the fossil tables look the way they do.
5) There are 272 known historical accounts of the story of Noah in various cultures all over the world.
6) Marco Polo was one of many famous people who claimed to have visited the ark.
7) Scientists reconstructed a model of the ark based on dimensions and descriptions found in the Bible as well as from the descriptions of many of the people who claimed to have seen it. They found that the ark was extremely sea worthy. The ark was constructed so that it would actually self-right itself when tipped and was capable of withstanding 200' tidal waves.
Apr 28, 2010 1:07pm
C

cbus4life

Ignorant

2,849 posts
Apr 28, 2010 1:10 PM
Thanks for the info, Mat.
Apr 28, 2010 1:10pm
G

Gblock

Apr 28, 2010 1:34 PM
Fab1b wrote:
buckeyefalls wrote: Questions (while I don't believe that this may be the real "ark"):

1. If it were, and they found proof, would this cause you skeptics to start believing in the Bible or would you make up excuses as to why it didn't belong to Christianity, but rather to other religions of the past?

2. If it were discovered by atheists and they could find that the dimensions matched Noah's ark of the Scripture, etc. and other similarities, what would it take for you to believe that the story was true and that maybe the Bible needs to be trusted a little more?

Not trying to be sarcastic, but I'm a firm believer that what Scripture teaches about the lost demanding physical signs that Jesus existed wouldn't matter because even when they are before your very eyes, you still deny.
I don't believe the bible to be word of "god" but story by man. I do believe pieces of the bible to be true and historical but because man himself witnessed an event. Take Noah for example. He could have built a boat to escape possible flooding in his region and took a few animals with him but of course the bible's version is much better as the story grew. Just my 2 cents.
some say this story is adaptation of the older story of gilgamesh
Apr 28, 2010 1:34pm
J

jmog

Senior Member

6,567 posts
Apr 28, 2010 1:43 PM
Gblock wrote:

some say this story is adaptation of the older story of gilgamesh
Or vice versa, yes.

Basically every ancient culture has a "flood" story.

The Jews have Noah.
The ancient arabians have the Epic of Gilgamesh.
The Koran even describes a global flood just like the Bible.

I could keep going on with the Incas, Mayans, Chinese, etc.

There is something like 200+ ancient flood descriptions in different cultures around the world.
Apr 28, 2010 1:43pm
F

Fred Flintstone

Senior Member

366 posts
Apr 28, 2010 1:44 PM
Gblock wrote:
Fab1b wrote:
buckeyefalls wrote: Questions (while I don't believe that this may be the real "ark"):

1. If it were, and they found proof, would this cause you skeptics to start believing in the Bible or would you make up excuses as to why it didn't belong to Christianity, but rather to other religions of the past?

2. If it were discovered by atheists and they could find that the dimensions matched Noah's ark of the Scripture, etc. and other similarities, what would it take for you to believe that the story was true and that maybe the Bible needs to be trusted a little more?

Not trying to be sarcastic, but I'm a firm believer that what Scripture teaches about the lost demanding physical signs that Jesus existed wouldn't matter because even when they are before your very eyes, you still deny.
I don't believe the bible to be word of "god" but story by man. I do believe pieces of the bible to be true and historical but because man himself witnessed an event. Take Noah for example. He could have built a boat to escape possible flooding in his region and took a few animals with him but of course the bible's version is much better as the story grew. Just my 2 cents.
some say this story is adaptation of the older story of gilgamesh
I was just going to post that. Here is a list of other flood stories from around the world

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html
Apr 28, 2010 1:44pm
ManO'War's avatar

ManO'War

Senior Member

1,420 posts
Apr 28, 2010 2:50 PM
oh "god"! It's getting deep in here!

It is kind of scary that there are actually people in the world, much less Ohio, that really believe this stuff.

The 3 Little Pigs could be in the bible and you would be on here trying to convince people that pigs could build houses and wolves could blow them down!
Apr 28, 2010 2:50pm
J

jmog

Senior Member

6,567 posts
Apr 28, 2010 3:15 PM
ManO'War wrote: oh "god"! It's getting deep in here!

It is kind of scary that there are actually people in the world, much less Ohio, that really believe this stuff.

The 3 Little Pigs could be in the bible and you would be on here trying to convince people that pigs could build houses and wolves could blow them down!
Its kind of "scary" how big if a douche you typically can be on these threads.

It takes more "faith" to believe molecules to single cell animal than it does to believe the stories in the Bible.

Since molecules to cell has been basically proven as impossible by science.
Apr 28, 2010 3:15pm
G

Gblock

Apr 28, 2010 3:31 PM
ManO'War wrote: oh "god"! It's getting deep in here!

It is kind of scary that there are actually people in the world, much less Ohio, that really believe this stuff.

The 3 Little Pigs could be in the bible and you would be on here trying to convince people that pigs could build houses and wolves could blow them down!
i think thats a little harsh...they did just find something that they are saying is this ark.....its an interesting discussion to me...and god is a natural part of the discussion. seems like most were just giving info on their thoughts.
Apr 28, 2010 3:31pm
J

jmog

Senior Member

6,567 posts
Apr 28, 2010 3:35 PM
Gblock wrote:
ManO'War wrote: oh "god"! It's getting deep in here!

It is kind of scary that there are actually people in the world, much less Ohio, that really believe this stuff.

The 3 Little Pigs could be in the bible and you would be on here trying to convince people that pigs could build houses and wolves could blow them down!
i think thats a little harsh...they did just find something that they are saying is this ark.....its an interesting discussion to me...and god is a natural part of the discussion. seems like most were just giving info on their thoughts.
Don't use logic and reason with MOW, as soon as he hears the word "God" or "Bible" he goes into a conniption fit and suddenly turns into the smartest human being alive and knows everything.
Apr 28, 2010 3:35pm
tk421's avatar

tk421

Senior Member

8,500 posts
Apr 28, 2010 4:06 PM
This is always a good one.

<object width="500" height="405"><param name="movie" value=" name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="405"></embed></object>



I'm sorry, call me whatever you wish, but anyone who takes a LITERAL interpretation of the story of Noah's Ark in the Bible, I just can't take seriously. I'll happily burn away in Hell, I just don't understand how anyone could believe that.
Apr 28, 2010 4:06pm
M

Mr Pat

Senior Member

519 posts
Apr 28, 2010 6:18 PM
ManO'War wrote: oh "god"! It's getting deep in here!

It is kind of scary that there are actually people in the world, much less Ohio, that really believe this stuff.

The 3 Little Pigs could be in the bible and you would be on here trying to convince people that pigs could build houses and wolves could blow them down!
Some people are believers, while others get all huffy and puffy when they're around believers. Let it go man, live and let live?
Apr 28, 2010 6:18pm
Fab1b's avatar

Fab1b

The Bald A-Hole!!

12,949 posts
Apr 28, 2010 7:03 PM
Well sometimes believers try to make you believe a little too much as well!
Apr 28, 2010 7:03pm
G

Gblock

Apr 28, 2010 7:06 PM
its certainly not more unbelievable than a video showing a bunch of proteins and amino acids mysteriously coming together and then being alive....i mean i ve never really come to a decision about what i believe...probably a lil of both
Apr 28, 2010 7:06pm
J

jmog

Senior Member

6,567 posts
Apr 28, 2010 8:13 PM
tk421 wrote: This is always a good one.

<object width="500" height="405"><param name="movie" value=" name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="405"></embed></object>



I'm sorry, call me whatever you wish, but anyone who takes a LITERAL interpretation of the story of Noah's Ark in the Bible, I just can't take seriously. I'll happily burn away in Hell, I just don't understand how anyone could believe that.
Well, he only made it 56 sec before his first mistake. The Bible says 15 cubits above the highest mountain, not 15 cubits total.

His 2nd mistake came at 2:25 when he said the Bible said Noah took every species, which is not true, it says he took every "kind" which in the old Hebrew translation translates similar to our "genus" or "family" toxocology of animals, not each species.


His 3rd major mistake at 3:56, saying Noah had to travel to our modern continents, even modern geologists and modern creationists will tell you about pangea, the supercontinent that existed in ancient times. He quickly repeated this error just 30 seconds later.

His 4th major mistake at 4:45, its his opinion, not scientific fact that 2 is not enough "genetic diversity" to repopulate the species.

He's a moron, basically.
Apr 28, 2010 8:13pm
NNN's avatar

NNN

Senior Member

902 posts
Apr 28, 2010 8:45 PM
jmog wrote: Well, he only made it 56 sec before his first mistake. The Bible says 15 cubits above the highest mountain, not 15 cubits total.

His 2nd mistake came at 2:25 when he said the Bible said Noah took every species, which is not true, it says he took every "kind" which in the old Hebrew translation translates similar to our "genus" or "family" toxocology of animals, not each species.


His 3rd major mistake at 3:56, saying Noah had to travel to our modern continents, even modern geologists and modern creationists will tell you about pangea, the supercontinent that existed in ancient times. He quickly repeated this error just 30 seconds later.

His 4th major mistake at 4:45, its his opinion, not scientific fact that 2 is not enough "genetic diversity" to repopulate the species.

He's a moron, basically.
Especially since the text actually says:
You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you. Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground [size=x-large]will come to you[/size] to be kept alive.
Apr 28, 2010 8:45pm
I

I Wear Pants

Senior Member

16,223 posts
Apr 28, 2010 9:59 PM
Dude's an idiot but what he was trying to point out remains true. There ain't no fuggin' way a guy got all of the species (or genus if that's the translation you want to use) on Earth onto one boat. I don't care if they all came to him or not. Shit isn't happening.
Apr 28, 2010 9:59pm
NNN's avatar

NNN

Senior Member

902 posts
Apr 28, 2010 10:09 PM
I Wear Pants wrote: Dude's an idiot but what he was trying to point out remains true. There ain't no fuggin' way a guy got all of the species (or genus if that's the translation you want to use) on Earth onto one boat. I don't care if they all came to him or not. Shit isn't happening.
That's a pretty sizable difference in terminology there, and those who didn't sleep through high school biology would be able to explain why.
Apr 28, 2010 10:09pm
I

I Wear Pants

Senior Member

16,223 posts
Apr 28, 2010 10:14 PM
There are a ton of fucking Genera (genus). I wasn't using it as a synonym.
Apr 28, 2010 10:14pm
dwccrew's avatar

dwccrew

Not Banned

7,817 posts
Apr 28, 2010 11:17 PM
jmog wrote:
tk421 wrote: This is always a good one.

<object width="500" height="405"><param name="movie" value=" name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="405"></embed></object>



I'm sorry, call me whatever you wish, but anyone who takes a LITERAL interpretation of the story of Noah's Ark in the Bible, I just can't take seriously. I'll happily burn away in Hell, I just don't understand how anyone could believe that.
Well, he only made it 56 sec before his first mistake. The Bible says 15 cubits above the highest mountain, not 15 cubits total.

His 2nd mistake came at 2:25 when he said the Bible said Noah took every species, which is not true, it says he took every "kind" which in the old Hebrew translation translates similar to our "genus" or "family" toxocology of animals, not each species.


His 3rd major mistake at 3:56, saying Noah had to travel to our modern continents, even modern geologists and modern creationists will tell you about pangea, the supercontinent that existed in ancient times. He quickly repeated this error just 30 seconds later.

His 4th major mistake at 4:45, its his opinion, not scientific fact that 2 is not enough "genetic diversity" to repopulate the species.

He's a moron, basically.
My question is, because I don't know the answer, is how long ago, according to the Bible did Noah and his ark adventure happen? I have to assume that the continent Pangea existed much, MUCH earlier than when Noah was around, but I don't know how long ago Noah was around.

Also, isn't the continent Pangea a theory? Not saying I dispute it, just asking if some scientists don't believe in the theory.
Apr 28, 2010 11:17pm
tk421's avatar

tk421

Senior Member

8,500 posts
Apr 28, 2010 11:33 PM
Well, he only made it 56 sec before his first mistake. The Bible says 15 cubits above the highest mountain, not 15 cubits total.

His 2nd mistake came at 2:25 when he said the Bible said Noah took every species, which is not true, it says he took every "kind" which in the old Hebrew translation translates similar to our "genus" or "family" toxocology of animals, not each species.


His 3rd major mistake at 3:56, saying Noah had to travel to our modern continents, even modern geologists and modern creationists will tell you about pangea, the supercontinent that existed in ancient times. He quickly repeated this error just 30 seconds later.

His 4th major mistake at 4:45, its his opinion, not scientific fact that 2 is not enough "genetic diversity" to repopulate the species.

He's a moron, basically.
Ha, this coming from someone who believes that a 600 year old man built a boat that had two of every "kind" of animal on Earth? Please.

If, as the Bible "claims", water rose 15 cubits or around 30 - 45 feet over the highest point on this planet, where exactly did all that water go? There would be water at a depth of 29K+ feet over the entire surface of the planet? Are we to believe that "God" made that water disappear?

Also, what about his point about the ecosystems of the Earth and its oceans? If we have enough fresh water to flood the Earth over the mountains, everything on the planet, including bacteria would die. What exactly did those animals that Noah had in his ark eat after those 40 days? Did "God" magically repopulate the Earth's ecosystems so that those lifeforms could survive? What about the predators on the Ark? Are we supposed to believe that they didn't eat a single animal for 40 days?

Secondly, you do realize that Pangea was 250 million years or so ago? I thought this flood was supposed to have taken place around 4800 years ago? Are you trying to tell us that the continents were stilled formed together only less than 5,000 years ago?
Apr 28, 2010 11:33pm
dwccrew's avatar

dwccrew

Not Banned

7,817 posts
Apr 29, 2010 12:02 AM
^^^That's the one thing I can't stand, is when faced with hard evidence that something in the Bible didn't happen, people use the "will of God" argument. Why doesn't anything like that happen now, only in the past?

To me, the "will of God" argument is when someone has no proof, so they need to use magic to support their argument.
Apr 29, 2010 12:02am
Heretic's avatar

Heretic

Son of the Sun

18,820 posts
Apr 29, 2010 12:02 AM
jmog wrote:
Gblock wrote:

some say this story is adaptation of the older story of gilgamesh
Or vice versa, yes.

Basically every ancient culture has a "flood" story.

The Jews have Noah.
The ancient arabians have the Epic of Gilgamesh.
The Koran even describes a global flood just like the Bible.

I could keep going on with the Incas, Mayans, Chinese, etc.

There is something like 200+ ancient flood descriptions in different cultures around the world.
True. The "flood story" likely was very real, considering how many cultures have legends based upon it. The Christianity movement jumped on that horse, just like the Norse (who also have their "Revelation" in Ragnarok) and others.

Most religions have piggy-backed off actual events specified in past religions (with the oldest possibly actually having experienced those events). The only current difference between Christianity and many others is that due to politics/warfare/etc., that movement was able to conquer vast regions and gain the influence to be very relevant for the past number of centuries. Just like the Greeks, Norse, Egyptians, etc. did back in the day.
Apr 29, 2010 12:02am
tk421's avatar

tk421

Senior Member

8,500 posts
Apr 29, 2010 12:44 AM
Besides the very real problems of the science of the idea of a "great" world wide flood, there is even more proof that it never happened. The ancient Egyptians, who kept very detailed records hundreds of years before and after, make no mention of any flood. The pyramids, which were built some 200 or so years before this supposed "flood" show absolutely no signs of every being submerged under water. The fact of the matter is, besides the completely illogical belief in "God", there is no evidence at all of any flood happening like in the Bible

There may have very well been localized floods in the regions mentioned in the Bible, but the idea of a flood covering the Earth over the mountains is completely crazy. No one would ever believe it if it weren't a part of the Bible. It's as crazy as believing in Santa or the Tooth Fairy.
Apr 29, 2010 12:44am