it was about two football pitches long and 4 stories high
2006-12-27 22:42:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by sam tyler 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think the Ark would probably make the Titanic look pretty small. I cannot tell you the exact proportions of it. Yes it was absolutely vast. Which is why Noah took so many years to construct it.
All the animals on the ark, it is believed that the ones that came were the young, not the large adults. So I wouldn't go picturing the huge adults as much. I'm sure a baby of each type would have been more realistic. Every area of that ark would have been constructed for all different types of animals. Plus, it is also believed that the animals could have gone into a possible state of hybernation within the ark and may not have needed much food, for they would probably have rested and slept most of the time.
I believe the story of Noah's Ark is literal.
2006-12-27 23:00:37
·
answer #2
·
answered by Gus 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
He didn't put 2 of each animal only on the ark. Go back and read: Of some things he put 7. Genesis 7:1-5. God is described as ordering Noah to take seven animals from each of the "clean" species, seven of each bird species, and two of every non-clean animal species.
The ark was to be 300 cubits (138 meters, 453 ft.) long, 50 (23 meters, 75.4 ft.) wide and 30 (14 meters, 45.9 ft) deep. This is based on the standard 46 cm. long regular cubit, which is an ancient unit of distance. It was the typical distance from an adult's elbow to the tip of their longest finger.
And of course, he would only have to have land animals. (I know, that's a big enough test already)
Also, because it's God we're talking about here, let's not minimize how he could have done it. These animals may very well have gotten along just fine, not eaten each other, the boat, or Noah and his family for the entire time.
2006-12-27 23:00:08
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Another of the flood story, in the Bible, states Noah took 7 each of the "clean" animals and 2 each of the "unclean". Maybe something the size of the Titanic could hold ALL of those animals? I really doubt it. And considering it rained for the 40 days and 40 nights, and from what I'm told he was on the ark for a little over 2 years.... what the hell did he feed the carnivors??
2006-12-28 00:04:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by Kithy 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
in case you imagine that is a noodle-baker, ask the position all the water necessary to flood the Earth got here from (in accordance to math, which could be more beneficial than 4 circumstances the quantity in all the oceans), then attempt to parent out the position all of it went. Creationists reveal their profound lack of understanding of physics with the help of fabricating their claims of a 'water-cover', which basically makes the Flood Account seem even extra ridiculous. A water-cover, frozen or not, basically won't be able to get away gravity. in case you had that a lot H2O suspended over the ambience, it may thoroughly block out the solar and reason freezing temperatures and go away flowers in a foul position. The Ark, in accordance to the Bible, had 3 decks and replaced into sealed with pitch just about to the very correct. Carbon Dioxide, the gas given off with the help of respiration animals, has a foul way of settling, meaning a efficient-air unit would were necessary to save this kind of large number of defecating, farting, and respiration animals from suffocating on their personal deadly gasses. Concluding that there might want to were ventilation close to the right does not make certain this difficulty. also, many animals devour a lot of nutrition over the approach a week, and others are carnivorous. The Ark replaced into out at sea a lot longer than 40 days. How a lot room do you assume this kind of cache of nutrition would occupy? i don't think of Creationists situation themselves with those questions (on widely used) for the easy reason that they don't seem to be in touch with technological knowledge or common sense, yet are extremely in touch with pushing their non secular perspectives on childrens and uneducated or ignorant adults. The solutions each man or woman who's determined on taking this ridiculous tale actually require the conception that "God can do some thing." nicely, my answer to that's, "So can Santa."
2016-12-01 06:21:30
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
As a christian I can say that the OT shouldn't be taken as literal events. It's just a method of sending a message to the people who it was given to in a simple manner in which they would understand. Imagine tell people at that time : the whole universe was created by a big explosion. Or you are the result of evolution over millions of years! They wouldn't even know what millions of years were. So The OT should be taken as a kind of Holy mythology. This doesn't mean that it shouldn't be studied, used for spiritual growth and reflection.
2006-12-27 23:36:11
·
answer #6
·
answered by Pichka 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not really. Back then there was not as much variety of animals as now. For example the cat family, he probably just took somthing that looked like a tiger, all the variety in cats we have today came from that tiger cat Noah took on the ark.
Same goes for every other kind.
It probably wasn't more that 100-200 kinds.
I think according to the bible the length was like 450 feet and it was like 3 stories tall.
2006-12-27 22:46:14
·
answer #7
·
answered by sfumato1002 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is estimated that it would have to have been the size of 5 football fields( or 4 Canadian) The beavers & termites were kept in the centre and near the top. Very good ques.
2006-12-27 22:45:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
extra wood for the termites, can't have them eating the ark now!
oooooooohhhh...
2 elephants would consume 300 kgs of bulky greenery per day!
10,000 species of termites... grrr the bats want to eat them.
and what about after they got off the ark? what did the animals eat then? everything BUT themselves were dead! all animals, all plant life...
EDIT:
ARIHAZ, you are implying that evolution of species DOES happen and that it started AFTER a flood that (geologically speaking) never took place?
EDIT 2:
GUS, you give us a wonderful argument on the basis of POSSIBLITY, but that has no real merit. it is also POSSIBLE that god could have preserved them whilst underwater, if all things are possible. check out my reference below, the noah myth is not true.
2006-12-27 22:45:29
·
answer #9
·
answered by Shawn M 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
every cubit is about the length of an angels arm, which is about 18 inches. Wait, thats what i remember from studies. but my memory is beginning to fail because of age.
i must tell you I dont think every animal was saved in noah's arch.
Only the ones that Noah could gather were saved
2006-12-27 22:44:40
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
apparently Noah's ark is in Iran and has been seen on several occasions, it was protected under the ice but has gradually degraded since the ice has receded,
alternatively Noah was a genetic scientist and stored all the DNA of the animals on his spaceship ark,
2006-12-27 22:55:48
·
answer #11
·
answered by Drunvalo 3
·
0⤊
0⤋