English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

26 answers

1,518,750 cubic feet

2007-05-31 12:25:55 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

Larger than any wooden boat could be without buckling under the force of the waves (see Lee Tiffin's book, Creationism's Upside-Down Pyramid, for the relevant calculations). Of course, one could say "God made a miracle and it didn't buckle", but then why didn't God just miraculously levitate everyone so they didn't need the ark, or why didn't God just make everyone but Noah's family die without having to come up with enough water to cover the mountains, and then have to make it mysteriously vanish, without leaving any trace?

I had to laugh when the person said he knows there is a real ark on Mt. Ararat because he read it in a Chick tract! Presumably that is another of Ron Wyatt's cons. But if the big boat-shaped mass they've photographed is the remnant of the ark, then that proves the Bible was wrong, since it says it was box-shaped (that is why it is called an 'ark' (i.e. a chest) rather than a 'ship'. Ron Wyatt is the same guy who took money off people by claiming to have found chariot wheels in the Red Sea. He even came up with a photo of what looks more like a ferry steering wheel. Some people will believe anything.

2007-05-31 22:14:47 · answer #2 · answered by jamesfrankmcgrath 4 · 0 0

.. the generally accepted size of the ark is 155 metres long, 25 metres wide and 15 metres high and it was to contain three decks, a side-opening door pair and a one-cubit square window at the top. ..


I think I remember reading that the ark was comparable in size to the Queen Mary, but there are a lot of problems with the story, even if the boat was big enough to contain all the livestock. They were on board for over a year. Imagine trying to feed them all and clean after them. And did God turn off their reproductive urges and cycles during that time? The Bible doesn't say. Only one window is mentioned for the whole boat and it was in the top story. Sounds like it would have been quite dark and smelly and noisy. Unless God put all the beasts to sleep, into hibernation, for the interval. Once again, it does not say. And how about geographical distribution after the flood? How long did it take the sloth to make it's way to South America? And how did all those wonderful marsupials get "down under"? These problems sure stretch the heck out of my credulity.

2007-05-31 21:19:17 · answer #3 · answered by harridan5 4 · 0 0

Some question whether or not Noah’s ark was large enough to hold all the animals, including the dinosaurs, that it had to carry. There are a number of parameters to be considered in responding to this question. First, since God Himself designed and created the animal kingdom, it is safe to conclude that He was similarly able to design a boat large enough to carry a portion of those animals to safety. To state otherwise is to impugn the nature and integrity of God. Second, the ark was approximately 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high, with slightly more than 100,000 square feet of cargo space. Noah was instructed to take into the boat land-dwelling, air-breathing animals. Today the number of species of animals that fit that description is about 20,000. Assuming that another 20,000 species have become extinct since that time, Noah would have to fit approximately 80,000 animals into the ark. The average size of those animals has been calculated to be that of a sheep (see Gish, 1990, p. 75). Thus, about 50,000 square feet of space on the boat would be filled, leaving another 50,000 available for foodstuffs, living quarters, etc. [NOTE: Noah was not commanded to take two, or seven, of every species into the ark, but every kind, which would shrink considerably the numbers of animals onboard the ark. A biblical “kind” is not necessarily the same as the biologists’ “species,” but can (and generally does) have a much broader classification.]

Third, it may be that God allowed Noah some latitude in regard to the animals that were taken onboard. For example, perhaps it was not necessary for Noah to take adult animals; rather, immature animals may have been stowed. This would save space, and prevent potential reproductive problems. Fourth, it is possible that God may have placed some, or all, of the animals into hibernation, thus making them easier to care for. The point is that the Flood was initated and controlled by God from beginning to end. It involved both God’s providential and miraculous intervention. Neither should be diminished in importance in the historical account of Genesis 6-8.

2007-05-31 20:22:03 · answer #4 · answered by TG 4 · 0 0

The ark was 300 cubits long, 50 cubits wide, and 30 cubits high. Conservatively calculating the cubit as 44.5 cm (17.5 in.) (some think the ancient cubit was nearer 56 or 61 cm), the ark measured 133.5 m by 22.3 m by 13.4 m (437 ft 6 in. × 72 ft 11 in. × 43 ft 9 in.),
Internally strengthened by adding two floors, the three decks thus provided gave a total of about 8,900 sq m (96,000 sq ft) of space.

2007-05-31 19:29:03 · answer #5 · answered by babydoll 7 · 0 0

Actually, your forgetting that many, many species could hibernate or burrow in the earth and stay dormant until needed. It was only those God needed on the Ark that were put on the Ark. Even we humans have unknown capacities in our bodies, things unknown as yet we are able to do and still live.

2007-05-31 19:28:23 · answer #6 · answered by AdamKadmon 7 · 0 0

He actually only contained the animals of the region- (the world) they knew- not the entire world- and only certain types of species were kpt on the ark. As well, in southern irag and middle east where this all occurred, based on physics the ship made of wood could only be a certain size, otherwise it would collapse in on itself.

2007-05-31 19:31:33 · answer #7 · answered by biomike_1998 2 · 0 0

something like 300 cubits by 100 cubits.

we agree that the mythology os derived form the middle east. so one must assume that the "world" meant all of the known land. thus we do not have to worry about animals in africa/china/america (north and south) etc.

still i feel that the lions probably caused the extinction of several of the smaller furry species.

furthermore many could survive fine in a flood. birds could perch on debris. and most amphibians could survive a little salt water.

2007-05-31 19:27:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The Bible gives a measurement. According to it, the ark was like half the size of the Titanic.

2007-05-31 19:25:22 · answer #9 · answered by Dylan H 3 · 0 0

Wait a minute
Since God of Genesis is Omnipotent why didn't he re-create CLEAN animals, rather than asking Noah's to gather. It would be faster, Cleaner, and economy.
Noah should had save 100 years of his life and 100 years of innocent life would be saved.

Check out at my question
http://sg.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AtO9o9cMvJsw_FgPFkkQhHD54gt.?qid=20070531031853AAeR3Zg

2007-05-31 20:50:09 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Pretty danged big!

If the pumas don't leave the bunnies alone, I SWEAR I'm turning this ark around right now!!!!

2007-05-31 19:30:51 · answer #11 · answered by glitterkittyy 7 · 3 0

fedest.com, questions and answers