It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Was Noah's Ark round?

page: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 17 2013 @ 12:41 PM

I have a question about Noah and his story....

What about all the other people that had boats? Did their boats just not work?

have heard that question before

For the LORD God had not caused it to rain on the earth, and there was no man to till the ground; but a mist went up from the earth and watered the whole face of the ground."
edit on 123131p://bTuesday2013 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 17 2013 @ 02:33 PM
reply to post by Stormdancer777

So, you're telling me that contrary to the geological record -- lakes, streams and oceans did not exist prior to Noah? It never even rained?

I'm not sure I buy that. And once again, why aren't we all inbred? If this is to be believed, then aren't we all shacking up with our relatives even to this day? Ew.

posted on Dec, 17 2013 @ 02:47 PM
reply to post by MystikMushroom

Well, I don't know I guess we will have to leave those chapters out.

Hey, I didn't write it.

But there are four accounts, which may be different stories of the same event, of Biblical proportion, har, that happened.
edit on 023131p://bTuesday2013 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 17 2013 @ 02:49 PM
reply to post by schuyler

I have to add one thing,
The flood of the bible and middle eastern mythos as well as other traditions around the Persian gulf and Indian oceans are remembrances of the same series of events, a series od cosmic impacts in the Indian ocean and Persian gulf, at the time of the first bronze age collapse, 4800 or so years ago.

The flood tales of the native north Americans, central Americans and certain south American tribes are a wholey different set of events and are much earlier and are related to onset of the younger dryas period, some 13k years ago, and proposed cosmic impacts of that time.

A few month ago I read an advance copy of a paper by a German team that has tentatively identified the location of Akkad, as well as a series of proposed craters in the same region. Unfortunately, the paper was removed from the web pending publication in a journal next year.

As far as the early bronze age collapse, and how it manifested in the archeological record of Mesopotamia, I would suggest reading the work of one Marie Agnes-Courty, a French archeological geologist, on the Tel Leian site in Syria.

edit on 17-12-2013 by punkinworks10 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 17 2013 @ 02:51 PM
reply to post by punkinworks10

Thank you

posted on Dec, 17 2013 @ 02:59 PM
reply to post by Stormdancer777

LOL, I suppose.

I also wonder how people drank water to survive if it never rained before Noah...

posted on Dec, 17 2013 @ 03:13 PM

reply to post by Stormdancer777

LOL, I suppose.

I also wonder how people drank water to survive if it never rained before Noah...
I figured springs that fed lakes and rivers. I wasnt there so Im not certain.. but its a good guess.

posted on Dec, 17 2013 @ 05:46 PM
Intriguing. I had not considered a round shape regarding the Ark. It's neat to see how legend can become a belief too grandiose to contain itself. The idea of having two of every animal in the world is whittled away to having two of those animals in their world, the immediate proximity.

I wonder, though. We have to wonder about what happens when a story is told and retold over time. We might find that those things that are the core point of the story may be exaggerated.

Now, knowing how a water cooler rumor can turn into "company policy" after only a few hours, imaging how the story has grown since it's original telling.

What's more is how such a story can lead to blind faith. Well, if it's faith, then "blind" should be the only way to embrace it.

I, however, do not.

posted on Dec, 17 2013 @ 06:25 PM
There are over one hundred thousand species of wasps alone. Collecting 2 of every animal onto one boat... this story is just about as ridiculous as it gets. It pains me that people can believe even a sliver of this. The power of religion is so incredibly frightening.

posted on Dec, 17 2013 @ 07:27 PM
reply to post by okrian

There are 30 million different animals on earth,meaning it would have taken Captain Noah about 300 years to get all his passengers safely on board his boat.Oh and of course the ark would have needed to have been the size of the Isle of Wight to fit them all on board.

posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 12:40 PM

reply to post by HumAnnunaki

I believe this theory over global warming

Thank you StormDancer & Player -

Glad you enjoyed the entertaining aspect to my re-write to
the Noah 'conspiracy'
(it's an abstract from a short Novella I have written)

So, as someone deeply familiar with Biblical cannontation (NOT Religious - EVER!!!)
I'll try my hand at explaining why Noah's story is false...

Long ago as someone whom pays attention to detail...and a natural born inquisitor;
I dissected the Noah fable -

I will do this from memory, so please correct me if I may be wrong

Noah built an Ark from God's instructions of 'gopher-wood' (?) to the measurements
of 300 Cubits long - 50 Cubits wide and 30 Cubits tall... all which works out in feet
using what we today understand of the Cubit measurement to measure Noah's Ark
at approximately 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet tall.

God sent (Noah did not collect or go in search of) "TWO" pairs of species of
everything "UN-CLEAN" and "SEVEN" pairs of species everything "CLEAN".

The ONLY humans aboard the Ark were Noah, his wife , their three sons and the sons three wives.

God gushed water from the ground and rain from the sky for 40 days and 40 nights.
(not a simple rain but 40 days and nights of TORENTIAL downpour)
The Ark was adrift for another 100 days AFTER the 40 days, 40 nights.
(zero to do with Global Warming)

That is where Noah's story credibility becomes false, from my point of view.

There is no possible way the Ark, which just happens to be smaller than todays
freighter ship/oil tanker ships, to be able to passage that many species.
(even if we discount all other countries on the western side of the world
as it was unknown in Noah's history)
What of all the food needed to feed the floating Zoo - and ALL the fresh
water needed for such a 140 day journey!
(that would take ANOTHER Ark in itself for the amount of provisions needed)
Then there are only 8 humans aboard the vessel, which according to a small
city's Zoo at todays standards, takes many more than 8 humans to attend.

Now lets look at the Ark's passage:
Ask yourself how it was that the Ark survived floating debris which would have
washed against the Ark causing damage.
How was it that the Ark wasn't smashed to pieces against debris, huge rocks or
even towering mountains..?

None of this is possible even at todays standards of technology, therefore
the Noah's Ark story (pardon the pun) is a WASHOUT!

There is much more to the fable, but all understands the ramifications
that was just explained - Noah's Ark (according to bible standards) not possible!

So we have history claiming Noah saved his family and the species
of this planet, but not other humans.. and yet, the world over
has flood stories reflecting Noah's unfound conclusions.

Most people reflect this knowledge to the Epic story of Giglamesh,
however, the Mayan stele tells a story of not only a great flood,
but also other calamities such as earthquakes and volcanism.

I realize all I did here was to create more questions -
but why follow blindly when the bible tells the story
hidden between the lines.

After all, as the bible quotes: "You have been given eyes for which to see!"

posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 05:15 AM
A large round ship is impossible to steer. The Russians built a monitor called the Novgorod which was round - and a total disaster.

posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 06:33 AM

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
A large round ship is impossible to steer. The Russians built a monitor called the Novgorod which was round - and a total disaster.

From the article below, it seems the Ark was unsteerable due to it's construction design, but that's not to say that, if it existed at all, it wasn't a roundish shape.

posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 06:44 AM

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
A large round ship is impossible to steer. The Russians built a monitor called the Novgorod which was round - and a total disaster.

From the article below, it seems the Ark was unsteerable due to it's construction design, but that's not to say that, if it existed at all, it wasn't a roundish shape.

Yes, but even a roundish shape is a bad idea. It's harder to steer and tends to wallow a great deal.
Besides, the entire thing is a myth. How did the marsupials get to Australia?

posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 07:21 AM
No the ark wasn't round. The bible even LISTS the ark's dimensions:

And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits. Genesis 6:15 KJV

By the way, an ark made from those dimensions will fall apart in the water:

Noah's Ark is too big to float

So, depending on what you use for a cubit, Ye Arke is about 450 feet long, 75 wide, and 45 tall, right? I work best in metres, so lets do a bit of conversion: that's 137.16 by 22.86 by 13.716 metres, right? For ease of calculation, let's call it 140 x 23 x 14. This give you 45.080e+3 cubic metres. One cubic metre of pure water is one metric tonne. Salt water is a bit more dense. Be nice, add another thousand tonnes or so... Ye Arke displaces 46,000 tonnes. Maybe 46,400 at max. And I'm being generous. (The reader who knows something about ship-building will also spot a certain minor problem with the above figures. No creationist has ever seen it... in part 'cause if it's corrected, things get worse for Ye Arke.)

The sheer size. HMS _Victory_, still preserved at Portsmouth, was 186 feet long on the gundeck. HMS _Victoria_, the last full-rigged 1st rate ship of the line to serve as flag of the Channel Fleet, built in 1859, was 250 feet long on the gundeck. And she had a steel frame because the RN had found that building wooden ships much bigger than 225 feet long was not a good idea because they tended to straddle or to hog on being launched; that is, they tended to bend, their bows and sterns to stick up out of the water at an angle, (that¹s straddling) or to bend the other way, the bows and sterns supported by waves but the midships sections out of the water (or at least not as well supported) (that¹s hogging) and either way their keels tended to crack under the strain. Even with steel frames, wooden ships bigger
than 250 feet long tended to hog or straddle. Don't take my word for it, look it up for yourself. One possible source: _The Wooden Fighting Ship In the Royal Navy, 897-1860_, EHH Archibald, Blandford Press, London. Sorry, my copy was published back before ISBNs. Edward Archibald was at the time of writing the curator of the National Maritime museum, Portsmouth, England. Or build a wooden boat 250 feet long and see what happens. Ye Arke was the size of _two_ 1st rate line of battleships, laid end-to-end. Noah was a shepherd. He knew better than the shipwrights at Chatham who built the ships with which the RN dominated the world for 150 years? If I'm wrong, and it is possible to build a 450 foot wooden vessel, by all means demonstrate it. I'll even put up some of the money... so long as I get to record the launch of said vessel. And so long as those who say that such a craft would be safe are willing to stay on
it while it's being launched. Me, I figure that I'd get some _great_ pix.

edit on 24-6-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 09:19 AM
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

It is just a story made up to explain and entertain and of course makes no factual scientific sense. Look at the vast amount of stuff made up here on ATS, often based on something real, then taken to crazy land for grins and giggles.

If you are ever bored read the creationist book by Woodmorappe, it's full of hate for anyone who belittles the story and full of fantastic explanations of 'how it would work'.

Excellent humor - unintended
edit on 24/6/14 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 10:54 AM
Noahs ark wasn't round because it didn't exist.

If Noahs Ark happened .. then this 80,000 year old tree colony wouldn't have survived.
PANDO Tree Colony

Pando (Latin for "I spread"), also known as The Trembling Giant,[1][2] is a clonal colony of a single male quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) determined to be a single living organism by identical genetic markers[3] and one massive underground root system. The plant is estimated to weigh collectively 6,000,000 kg (6,600 short tons),[4] making it the heaviest known organism.[5] The root system of Pando, at an estimated 80,000 years old, is among the oldest known living organisms.[6][7]
Pando is located 1 mile southwest of Fish Lake on Utah route 25.[8] in the Fremont River Ranger District of the Fishlake National Forest, at the western edge of the Colorado Plateau in South-central Utah, at N 38.525 W 111.75.

Science Daily
At this time there are 6.5 million land animal species on the planet. There were even more back in what was supposedly Noahs time. Two of each animal would mean at least 13 million animals on that boat. NOT A CHANCE!! Couldn't happen.

Light doesnt penetrate the ocean more than about 500 ft. if the earth were submerged under 29,000 ft. in order to cover mt. everest, no marine plant life would have survived and the oceans would be dead. Obviously that didn't happen.

Could Noahs' Ark Have Actually Happened?

If the 2350 date were correct, then human civilization would’ve had to undergo an extreme population explosion in the millenium following the flood. According to Biblical sources, there would have been millions of Jews leaving Egypt, so assuming a global population of 40 million around that time (~1350 BC), and comparing that to global population estimates later in history (an estimated 200+ million by 0 AD), would require an incredibly high population growth between 2350 BC and 1350 BC (5,000,000 fold increase in 1,000 years), and a much lower population growth after 1350 BC – usually less than 5 fold population growth within any 1,000 year period between 1350 BC and 1800 AD.

(3) The distribution of animals is not what we would expect if there were a global flood killing all life. If all life was limited to the top of a mountain in the Middle East in 2350 B.C., then how to explain the distribution of animals across the world? All the kangaroos on the Ark went to Australia? How did the animals get to the Americas? If they crossed via an ice-bridge in the Bering Strait, then the Americas should be limited to animals that are warm blooded and capable of traveling hundreds of miles across snow. This means no reptiles, no spiders, etc. Yet, the Amazon contains a wide variety of animal biodiversity. And why didn’t American desert animals stay behind in the deserts of the Old World? (See related post: “Creationism versus Animal Biodiversity”)

(4) Genetic evidence shows that human beings are far to genetically diverse to be descended from a single family in 2350 B.C. If Noah’s Ark were true, then all men alive today would’ve gotten their Y-chromosomes from Noah, and all human mitochondrial DNA would come from Noah’s wife and the three daughter-in-laws. Studies of the human Y-Chromosome show that you’d need far more than 4,300 years to accumulate that many mutations. Human beings could not be descended from a single male in 2350 B.C. What the studies show, instead, is that, in order to explain the number of mutations in the human Y-Chromosome, you have to allow for roughly 60,000-90,000 years. Similarly, human mitochondrial DNA requires roughly 160,000 years to accumulate that many mutations — showing that Eve could not have lived 6,000 years ago as the Bible says.

Adam and his Eves - A lesson on DNA and population distribution for you

Creationism vs Biodiversity

Additionally, once the animals left the Ark, there are a lot of nearby regions they could inhabit, but didn’t. For example, all varieties of rattlesnakes are found in the Americas (33 species, and numerous subspecies). There are none in the Old World – despite the fact that there are regions similar to the American deserts – the Sahara, the Middle East, the Gobi Desert, etc. Llamas fit this same pattern – found in the New World, but not in the Old World. The Caucus (where the Ark supposedly landed) and Himalaya mountains have different species than the Rocky Mountains and Andes. Why didn’t some of the Rocky Mountain species stick around in the Caucus Mountains – they were already there the minute they stepped off the Ark. Similarly, the species in the South American tropics aren’t found in Old World tropics (Southeast Asia and Africa), and vice-versa. For example, New World cats and monkeys are different species than Old World cats and monkeys. Theoretically, with the movement of creatures caused by the global flood, one could find the same species living in distant places. Somehow, we don’t.

National Geographic - Human DNA Journey
For Noahs Ark to have happened exactly as the bible claims, we'd expect the highest levels of genetic diversity to be in the Middle East. But the fact is that the highest levels of human genetic diversity occur in Africa where humanity evolved.

Noahs Ark Doesn't Float

Miles of coral reef, hundreds of feet thick, still survive intact at the Eniwetok atoll in the Pacific Ocean. The violent flood would have certainly destroyed these formations, yet the rate of deposit tells us that the reefs have survived for over 100,000 undisturbed years. Similarly, the floodwaters, not to mention the other factors leading to a boiling sea, would have obviously melted the polar ice caps. However, ice layers in Greenland and Antarctica date back at least 40,000 years.

Impact craters from pre-historical asteroid strikes still exist even though the tumultuous floodwaters would have completely eroded them. If these craters were formed concurrently with the flood, as it has been irresponsibly suggested, the magnificent heat from the massive impacts would have immediately boiled large quantities of the ocean, as if it wasn’t hot enough already. Like the asteroid craters, global mountain ranges would exhibit uniform erosion as a result of a global flood. Unsurprisingly, we witness just the opposite in neighboring pairs of greatly contrasting examples, such as the Rockies and Appalachians.

posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 11:40 AM
a reply to: FlyersFan

....not to forget all the fresh water creatures that would have died, etc

NA is one of those stories that makes no sense and one of the sillier biblical tales, but the more they are debunked the more they must be defended by the true believers.

posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 09:30 PM
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Great point. The Bible "LISTS the dimensions" so we all should know them really.

Just my guess but I reckon the guy got like a Dog, a Cat and maybe a Cow. Couple of Chickens, maybe a Goat, a few Sheep. But as for your regular Gecko, Python, Great Ape, Desert Fox, Dung Beetle, Shubunkin or Butterfly goes.. They seem to have survived this one on their own to their great credit.

posted on Jun, 25 2014 @ 11:54 PM
a reply to: Stormdancer777

Bible has two meanings, symbolic for the wise, and literal meaning, for not so wise. For example Garden of Eden is our bodies with tree of life our spinal chord that contains all our senses which we were allowed to use except for the apple (sex energy) etc. So Noah might be story of a man that is one with God which like a boat allowed him to rise above the flood of evil that is wiping out all of mankind.

top topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in