Skunks on Noah's Ark.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-10-2015, 06:54 AM
RE: Skunks on Noah's Ark.
(22-10-2015 06:52 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  
(22-10-2015 05:26 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  even if you ran them through a wood chipper and made juice out of them first.


Shocking

There's an image...
And nice and bloody... Perfect for the bloodthirsty xtian mobs....

Their religion is FOUNDED on blood...

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2015, 07:07 AM
RE: Skunks on Noah's Ark.
(22-10-2015 06:53 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  
(22-10-2015 06:49 AM)Old Man Marsh Wrote:  The methane saturation on an airtight vessel would have killed everything before it exploded.
It couldn't explode.

There wouldn't be room for oxygen.

Yeah, you're right. Seven of every clean animal, two of unclean, plus the humans and feed. There's no way.

Don't let those gnomes and their illusions get you down. They're just gnomes and illusions.

--Jake the Dog, Adventure Time

Alouette, je te plumerai.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2015, 08:21 AM
RE: Skunks on Noah's Ark.
Anyone who hasn't seen this yet -- it's the best debunking site I've seen....

http://ncse.com/cej/4/1/impossible-voyage-noahs-ark


They cover it from all the angles..

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like onlinebiker's post
22-10-2015, 08:32 AM
RE: Skunks on Noah's Ark.
Humans Rolleyes The fact that a debunking site even exists is a bit of an indictment of our species as a whole.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like morondog's post
22-10-2015, 09:00 AM
RE: Skunks on Noah's Ark.
(22-10-2015 06:13 AM)unfogged Wrote:  
(22-10-2015 05:54 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  I ran into an article that calculated the thermal energy from a rainfall that intense would have boiled the oceans, I can't seem to find it right now.

The easy theist response is that the story also says that the "fountains of the deep" opened up so not all the water came as rain. Some came up from underground.

It's ridiculous, but it does make any claims about the effects of the rain impossible to support because there is no indication of how much supposedly fell as rain.

Yeah, when I hear that "fountains of the deep" shit it makes me wonder if they use the same physics books I do. What possible mechanism would "squeeze" an ocean's worth of water up the gravity well and onto the surface for a year? Where is that water? We know there's subsurface water locked in chemical form in very deep layers, perhaps an equal amount to the current volume of the ocean, but there's no freakin' way that it comes to the surface like that.

The problem is that according to the US Geological Survey the volume of the ocean is 332,519,000 cubic miles of water, with an average depth of 2.3 miles. That sounds like a lot until you realize that it doesn't cover the land masses and that the height of Mt. Everest above sea level is 5.5 miles, almost exactly. That means the ocean would have to expand its depth by 2.4 times as much... and it's a radius expansion around the earth. With earth's radius to mean sea level being 3,959 miles, we can calculate the volume difference between a the two radii (3,964.5 miles = new height), and subtract that difference, to get the volume of water that would be necessary.

Using the volume equation at those radii, we get a difference of 1,084,242,762.91 cubic miles of additional ocean. That's 3.26 times the volume of the original ocean, in addition to what's already there, in order to cover Mt. Everest.

Oops... math!

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
22-10-2015, 09:15 AM
RE: Skunks on Noah's Ark.
(22-10-2015 05:54 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  I ran into an article that calculated the thermal energy from a rainfall that intense would have boiled the oceans, I can't seem to find it right now.

Biker already brought up a great article on the issues, but TalkOrigins also has a pretty decent page on the subject.

I like the TalkOrigins examination of the physics because it deals with the only process by which the water could have "come up" from the "fountains of the deep" against gravity like that, and it calculates that that process would also be more than enough to boil off all the oceans.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
22-10-2015, 09:39 AM
RE: Skunks on Noah's Ark.
I always wonder about the gophers and moles and other below ground animals. Did Noah have a bunch of dirt on the boat or did the gophers hang out above ground for the duration of the flood? Must have been very uncomfortable for them is that's the case.

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2015, 10:25 AM
RE: Skunks on Noah's Ark.
(22-10-2015 05:40 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  
(22-10-2015 05:26 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  Even less of a problem, seeing there wouldn't be any air.

The math is pretty straightforward -- if you use the dimensions given, and discount any interior structure (giving the theist a generous advantage) -- two of every animal would not fit inside --- even if you ran them through a wood chipper and made juice out of them first.

...

You mean before the hydraulic pressure from the force of 363 inches of rainfall per hour (roughly 150 times more than the hardest rainfall ever recorded in a sustained storm, in SuperTyphoon Haiyan) melted that boat like cotton candy under a firehose?

Talk about straightforward math: 40 days/nights = 960 hrs of rainfall. Height of Everest = 29,029'. Divide and get 363"/hr of rainfall for the full 40.

God done it. Miracles. hashtag my god can do anything. Big Grin

**Crickets** -- God
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2015, 10:27 AM
RE: Skunks on Noah's Ark.
My favorite remains the gall wasps.

Gall wasps are wasps that reproduce by laying eggs inside of trees. They are responsible for, among other things, the seasonal "oak apples" that swell up on oak trees like goiters or lightweight wooden fruit and then drop to the ground. Those are actually little nests for parasitic larva.

With life cycles only a year in length, they would have had to reproduce at least once during the ark's voyage. (I THINK their lifespan's less than a year in length, but this is the part I'm least sure about. They have a weird reproductive cycle including every other generation being only females, that correspond to seasons of spring and autumn, suggesting the limited lifespan of at least the males, but today I went back and tried to confirm that their lifespan is no more than a year long and couldn't find a reference.)

Reproduction would require a live, relatively mature (older than just a sapling) oak tree on the ark itself. Since there are parasites that prey on THESE parasites (laying their own eggs in the galls to ravage the developing larvae), this really wouldn't be dispensable.

On the bright side, the oak tree would accommodate some of the nesting requirements of a great many species, including worms that burrow into acorns. On the downside, you have to figure out how to get an oak tree on the already-buoyancy-challenged ark... with a closed door and a tiny window... getting enough sunlight to survive... and the right amount of FRESH water to its root system over the course of that year.

Remember, the animals were inside the ark, so if they were in the trees, the trees would have to have been inside the ark as well. Good thing, too, because if you put them atop the ark's hull, the thing would probably have capsized.

Further complicating the matter, the galls are grown by replicating the hormones specific to certain species of trees. You'd need multiple oaks from DIFFERENT SPECIES... again, crowding that one window for sunlight. There are other varieties of gall wasps that require different types of trees beyond oaks.

For bonus points, explain why the California oak, having served host to some of these gall wasps on the voyage and no doubt producing a goodly number of acorns, did not manage to colonize the region around Mt. Arafat, but instead managed to somehow spring up halfway around the world in the similar environment of California.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Reltzik's post
22-10-2015, 10:28 AM
RE: Skunks on Noah's Ark.
(22-10-2015 09:00 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  
(22-10-2015 06:13 AM)unfogged Wrote:  The easy theist response is that the story also says that the "fountains of the deep" opened up so not all the water came as rain. Some came up from underground.

It's ridiculous, but it does make any claims about the effects of the rain impossible to support because there is no indication of how much supposedly fell as rain.

Yeah, when I hear that "fountains of the deep" shit it makes me wonder if they use the same physics books I do. What possible mechanism would "squeeze" an ocean's worth of water up the gravity well and onto the surface for a year? Where is that water? We know there's subsurface water locked in chemical form in very deep layers, perhaps an equal amount to the current volume of the ocean, but there's no freakin' way that it comes to the surface like that.

The problem is that according to the US Geological Survey the volume of the ocean is 332,519,000 cubic miles of water, with an average depth of 2.3 miles. That sounds like a lot until you realize that it doesn't cover the land masses and that the height of Mt. Everest above sea level is 5.5 miles, almost exactly. That means the ocean would have to expand its depth by 2.4 times as much... and it's a radius expansion around the earth. With earth's radius to mean sea level being 3,959 miles, we can calculate the volume difference between a the two radii (3,964.5 miles = new height), and subtract that difference, to get the volume of water that would be necessary.

Using the volume equation at those radii, we get a difference of 1,084,242,762.91 cubic miles of additional ocean. That's 3.26 times the volume of the original ocean, in addition to what's already there, in order to cover Mt. Everest.

Oops... math!


..but...but God!!!!Facepalm

**Crickets** -- God
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: