Actually, the engineers at Boeing are quite silly if they are still using wind tunnels to test the aerodynamics of aircraft. It was recently discovered (damn, I can’t quote the date of the Hartford Courant in which I saw the article) that one of the laws of aerodynamics is incorrect. The reason? Scale models interact differently on a molecular level pertaining to friction from air drag! Ergo, models aren’t necessarily viable solutions for actual happenings. This particular “law” of aerodynamics engineers have used for years is a myth. Although aerodynamics doesn’t apply to arks as substantially as it does airplanes, hydrodynamics, permittivity, et cetera would be different for a model than a full scale rendition.
I’m not trying to be derisive, but I highly doubt that reason as anything to do with your conclusion. Perhaps it would be more accurate to state: “That which created the purpose is reason, i.e. mental faculties,” eh? Or is it the case that you have so little “faith” in human capacity. As an aside, if you utilize the arguement you previously offered, you condemn yourself to predeterminism.
You asked for people to explain how a boat got on a mountain if not God.
It was said that perhaps the Invisible Pink Unicorn put it there.
You discounted that out of hand.
I pointed out that you could substitute any other god-type being in the place of “God.”
So who’s right? Was it God, Vishnu, The Leader or the Unicorn?
My point is that anyone could make anything fit your hypothetical boat situation, and they’d all claim to be right, and you’d be arguing this until the day you die. If it’s what you believe, no one is telling you not to believe it, but you seem intent on making people believe it, too.
If we were to come up with a reasonable explanation, you wouldn’t believe it, because you believe it was God. If we cannot come up with a reasonable explanation, you take that as proof that God did it.
Your own signature line fits you as well as it fits us.
You give no credence to any other religion but Christianity, so therefore any argument that does not directly relate to the rightness of Christianity is wrong.
Pashley, if you’d actually read all the posts instead of the ones you can argumentatively respond to, everyone on here has agreed that your hypothetical boat would grant the possibility that the Bible is right in that instance.
If you argue that the religion of the Invisible Pink Unicorn is less valid due to its brief history, perhaps I can interest you in the Hindu religion, which predates Christianity by 2500 years - and Ancient Isreal by 500 years.
Oh hell, let me give an answer for the question in the original OP:
Start of story
Three hundred years after the flood story, a group of men decided to pay homage to God. They travelled to Mt. Ararat to the supposed site of the Ark to worship. When they did not find it, they prayed to God for guidance. Not getting a clear answer, they decided to build a holy temple to God.
Travelling back into the countryside, they told people of their grand plan to build a temple to God. They would construct an Ark on Ararat, using the dimensions of the original Ark as described in the sacred texts. They amassed a mighty horde of believers, and set out to build the temple. It took many, many days, but eventually it was finished. They carefully built it to lay on the mountain just as the real Ark would have, and even carried animals in and out of it as one of their sacred rituals.
End of Story
There. How’s that? Unlikely? More unlikely than a Omnipotent Deity who flooded the world? Bear in mind that if this story were true we would find an Ark indistinguishable from the ‘original’, that never did exist.
And if you think this is far-fetched, I might point out that this notion of re-creating a mythical holy object was commonplace in ancient times.
Let’s put it another way: Let’s say that there is an ancient myth that the Snake-God Sssammy killed his enemies with a metal forked-tongue 50 feet long. One day, an archaologist excavates a 50-foot metal forked tongue. Are you going to bow down and start worshipping Sssammy, or are you going to assume that perhaps some Sssammy followers built a replica to spec?
Agreed, but would you also agree that their stability is tested as well?
That may be the case, I don’t know. However the person that originally started this wood argument was suggesting that is was a barn up there. My point was, why would they haul all the little wood they have up a mountain to make a barn. There would be no point to that.
Neither do I . There is no fixed answer; I wanted to hear what people might say about this situation. Is that a crime?
Please tell me your kidding!
Patrick Ashley
“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown
To be sure. But by the same reasoning, why would they haul all that wood up to build an ark? On a mountain top? As was suggested, perhaps as a religeous gesture, but that sounds unlikely, too. Of course, it could have been left there by a great flood, but haven’t we pretty much established that that would be impossible?
Going back to the OP - IF an ark were found there, I’d pretty much think “hoax.” But I wouldn’t automatically discount any evidence to the contrary. AAMOF, I’d be most interested in it!
You’re trying to prove the historical accuracy of the Bible using evidence that doesn’t exist?
How innovative! I think I’m going to start this thread:
If the following came to pass -
A round metal disk, measuring 60 inches in diameter was found, there were what looked like small footprints all around it, and some unidentified green gooey matter
How would you anti-alien zealots deal with that?
Huh? I’d love to hear what you have to say. And don’t say that it hasn’t/can’t happen…that’s just a cop-out.
Then, I’m going to get all offended when people post things like:
“Maybe someone just put it there.”
Then I’m going to stamp my feet and say, “But, there ARE aliens…see, it could have happened that someone found something like that disk…aliens DO exist!!! All of you who say otherwise just hate us alien lovers!!! Anyone want to shake hands?”
I’m afraid not. You can test whether the shape of the hull will cause specific perturbations as different speeds. Unfortunately, you cannot test the stability (which requires that the center of gravity and the weight distribution be known precisely) on a block of wood or plastic purporting to be a hollow vessel with totally unknown internal structures and no discernible way to identify where different animals (and forage) would be stored within that hull. Identifying the hydraulic action surrounding a hull in motion is far different from determining “stability.” (And, as Nen has pointed out, there are variations of scale in fluid dynamics that render even the tests we have used irrelevant in many cases.)
Except that if, before the deforestation and desertification of the region, they had lots of wood, much of it growing on the mountain, then your premise is flawed. At the time of the flood story, that region was not generally desert.
As to your ignorance of the Invisible Pink Unicorn, I suggest a web search, post-haste.
Just enter “invisible pink unicorn” into Google. I assure you that Gaudere has not invented Her Eminence–and certainly not in just the last day. (Try to keep up, here.)
(I’m NOT trusting the cgi, dammit. I apologize if this is the second time you’re seeing this…I made a couple changes, though.)
Ummm, pashley, I don’t get it.
You’re trying to prove the historical accuracy of the Bible using evidence that doesn’t exist?
How innovative! I think I’m going to start this thread:
If the following came to pass -
A round metal disk, measuring 60 inches in diameter was found, there were what looked like small footprints all around it, and some unidentified green gooey matter
How would you anti-alien zealots deal with that?
Huh? I’d love to hear what you have to say. And don’t say that it hasn’t/can’t happen…that’s just a cop-out.
Then, I’m going to get all offended when people post things like:
“Maybe someone just put it there.” Or
“But, I don’t think that disk would have been aerodynamic and would have been able to survive entering our atmosphere.”
Then I’m going to stamp my feet and say, “But, there ARE aliens…see, it could have happened that someone found something like that disk…aliens DO exist!!! All of you who say otherwise just hate us alien lovers!!! Anyone want to shake hands?”
(I’m NOT trusting the cgi, dammit. I apologize if this is the second time you’re seeing this…I made a couple changes, though.)
Ummm, pashley, I don’t get it.
You’re trying to prove the historical accuracy of the Bible using evidence that doesn’t exist?
How innovative! I think I’m going to start this thread:
If the following came to pass -
A round metal disk, measuring 60 inches in diameter was found, there were what looked like small footprints all around it, and some unidentified green gooey matter
How would you anti-alien zealots deal with that?
Huh? I’d love to hear what you have to say. And don’t say that it hasn’t/can’t happen…that’s just a cop-out.
Then, I’m going to get all offended when people post things like:
“Maybe someone just put it there.” Or
“But, I don’t think that disk would have been aerodynamic and would have been able to survive entering our atmosphere.”
Then I’m going to stamp my feet and say, “But, there ARE aliens…see, it could have happened that someone found something like that disk…aliens DO exist!!! All of you who say otherwise just hate us alien lovers!!! Anyone want to shake hands?”
It was a mistake!! I was thinking “pink,” but wrote “purple!” I know She is pink!! I swear!! Please don’t let Her Pinkness crush me with Her hooves of Righteousness!
