Mentioned in the references for the article.
Posted on 04/14/2014 8:43:16 AM PDT by fishtank
Students Surprised to Find Noah's Ark Feasible by Brian Thomas, M.S. *
Advanced physics students at Leicester University were tasked with determining if the Biblical dimensions of Noah's ark—assuming it was properly constructed—could have supported the mass of 70,000 animals. Student Kayie Raymer told UK's The Telegraph that after other "more serious" assignments, this one was "something different."1 What did they find?
The students used 48.2cm (almost 19 inches) as the length of a cubit to estimate the total dimensions of the ark. Using the density of water and Archimedes' principle of buoyancy, they calculated the total mass the ark could contain without sinking.
"Previous research has suggested that there were approximately 35,000 species of animals which would have needed to be saved by Noah," according to The Telegraph, though they cited no source for this estimate. Doubling this number to account for a male and female of each species, the student group estimated that the ark needed to have held approximately 70,000 creatures. To the students' surprise, they found that this amount did not exceed the total mass the ark could contain. Physics student Thomas Morris told The Telegraph, "You don't think of the Bible necessarily as a scientifically accurate source of information, so I guess we were quite surprised when we discovered it would work." The students published their results in Leicester University's Journal of Physics Special Topics.
The students' results at the ark having 70,000 creatures actually exceed biblical expectations, giving further assurance that the ark could hold all that it needed—including food and even water.
Creatures change within the boundaries of their own "kinds" or fundamental forms, so Noah certainly did not need to take on board all "species,"a modern term that seems to bear as many definitions as there are researchers who use it.
What about the biblical detail given in Genesis, which noted seven of each bird kind—probably meaning seven pairs of each bird kind—on board Noah's ark? If today's "species" were substituted for basic "kinds" here, then the total number of birds would probably have exceeded ark capacity. However, creation biologists have been combing the literature for breeding records that help them estimate which "species" likely belonged to a "kind."2 For example, breeding studies link sparrows and finches as within-kind creatures.3 Instead of over 1,000 sparrow or finch "species," perhaps as few as 14 sparrow-finch representatives were on the ark.
Applying this principle to all "species" would dramatically reduce Leicester University's student-estimated 70,000 animals. Creation researcher John Woodmorappe's book, Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study, estimated the number of ark kinds as the number of families of extant and extinct air-breathing, land-dwelling animals, totaling about 8,000 kinds or 16,000 individuals—including the sevens of birds and clean animals.4 That would require merely one third of the ark's volume, leaving plenty of space for provisions and people.
It's amazing what happens when the Bible's accuracy is put to the test. The Leicester University physics students "were astonished to find out that the Ark would have floated," according to The Telegraph.1 How much more astonished would they be to find that the Ark not only could have floated, but could have carried all its passengers and their provisions for a whole year, just as the Scriptures say? Since the Bible contains spiritual truths, discovering that the Bible also records historical truth turns out to be "more serious" than secularized students at first suspect.
References
Knapton, S. Noah's Ark would have floated...even with 70,000 animals. The Telegraph. Posted on telegraph.co.uk April 3, 2014, accessed April 3, 2014
Henigan, T. An Initial Estimate toward Identifying and Numbering the Ark Turtle and Crocodile Kinds. Answers Research Journal. 7 (2014): 1-10.
Lightner, J.K. 2010. Identification of a large sparrow-finch monobaramin in perching birds (Aves: Passeriformes). Journal of Creation. 24 (3): 117-121
Woodmorappe, J. 1996. Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study. Santee, CA: Institute for Creation Research.
* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.
Article posted on April 11, 2014.
So would any scientist worth their paycheck.
There are loads more problems to overcome than either you or the article have postulated.
Here’s a website that explains how modern science could be mis-reading the evidence from the past.
Center for Scientific Creation - In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/IntheBeginningTOC.html
Here’s another link to make you think. All too often we all are forced to swallow the long ages theories regarding geology and starlight yet if you apply critical thinking
I’m sure you can find many varied and myriad problems for long ages of critters roaming the Earth [i.e. scientists fearing the lunar landing getting swallowed up in several feet of moon dust that turned out to be a few inches].
Many ignore Einstein and gravitational time dialtion when postulating long ages for starlight too. Simply saying modern science often rushes to conclusions before clearly stating their assumptions first.
101 Evidences for a Young Age of the Earth...And the Universe
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
No scientist can claim to follow the scientific method when trrying to re-create long ages of history. Just how would those experiments work?
Most areas that have been flooded or for that matter wiped out by fire show signs of life within 1 year. Also any seeds that were not able to survive 1 year underwater may well have been found clinging to animal fur on the ark.
I find it amazing that 99.9% of all life forms are now extinct. And our ‘betters’ decided to blame man and create several gov red-tape outfits to ‘solve’ the problem.
Mentioned in the references for the article.
Food Requirements on the Ark
• The Ark would probably have carried compressed and dried foodstuffs, and probably a lot of concentrated food.
• Perhaps Noah fed the cattle mainly on grain, plus some hay for fiber.
• Woodmorappe calculated that the volume of foodstuffs would have been only about 15 % of the Ark’s total volume.
• Drinking water would only have taken up 9.4 % of the volume. This volume would be reduced further if rainwater was collected and piped into troughs.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/Magazines/docs/cen_v19n2_animals_ark.asp
Waste Disposal on the Ark
• It is doubtful whether the humans had to clean the cages every morning.
• Possibly they had sloped floors or slatted cages, where the manure could fall away from the animals and be flushed away (plenty of water around!) or destroyed by composting by worms which would also provide earthworms as a food source.
• Very deep bedding can sometimes last for a year without needing a change. Absorbent material (e.g. sawdust, softwood wood shavings and especially peat moss) would reduce the moisture content and hence the odor.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/Magazines/docs/cen_v19n2_animals_ark.asp
Furthermore, the ark dimensions have been calculated at approx 350 rail cars or 20 pairs per car per your extremely high estimate of 70,000 pairs.
<><><><
You may want to check your math. 350 * 20 = 7,000, not 70,000.
Multi cellular life has been around for over one billion years with several mass extinction thrown in. That’s what give a 99.9% species extinction figure. Environmentalist are political animals and, as such are addicted to polemics.
Unless you consider that the rudder was undersized.
In hindsight - a massive engineering over-site...
Between the flow velocities needed to attain "hydroplate" migration of the continents, and the temperatures and pressures required to form fossils and sedimentary rock in the timeframe required, everything in the water should have been ripped to shreds and parboiled.
My point exactly
Not just the land plants. All of the aquatic plants and animals, too. They say Noah didn’t have to make room on the boat for the fish, they could survive just fine in the water, then posit water conditions to explain the fossil record and continental drift that nothing could survive in.
Not quite - the hydroplate theory [have either of you even read it?] also posits the ripping open of the Earth’s atmosphere and causing the ice age. So the heat was offset by an immediate cooling. It’s possible there was a massive loss of sea life but the land, air and sea have been re-stocked fairly well considering a massive break in the Earth’s crust circumnavigating the globe.
I too would find it impossible to believe if it were not for all of the evidence worldwide. There is no other theory that so completely explains so many of the unique biologic, geologic and stellar features found by modern man.
Maybe a 6-part hour long video could help folks understand who have no time to read a free online book less than 500 pages.
Videos Fountains of the Deep, Flood of Noah by Pastor Kevin Lea of Port Orchard, OR
http://www.youtube.com/user/CalvaryChurchPO#p/c/11/XXQKSv5o_Po
Incidentally, Pastor Kevin Lea carries quite a bit more credibility than most pastors - he obtained a degree in Nuclear Physics prior to becoming a pastor.
The multi-part video on Earthquakes is a real eye-opener too if you’d like to understand where true climate change future is headed. Not that I like to be the bearer of bad news but I’d rather folks be informed as much as possible.
That doesn't mitigate the damage do to physical pounding from the water. If you could attain "immediate cooling", then you've lost one of the necessary conditions that have been used to explain the fossils. An atmosphere cold enough to cool off that much hot seawater that fast would have frozen everyone and everything on the ark in no time. Every explanation seems to involve some nearly impossible physical extreme that's incompatibly with the explanations of other events supposedly happening at the same time.
If you could just read....
To experience the problems you are describing one would have to be near to the fault line. How near is conjecture [just like your comments] but the Earth is 25,000 miles in circumference fcol.
Also akaik the fossils were laid down primarily by quick burial under heavily sediment-saturated waters. How quickly the heat dissipated is not nearly as problematic.
There is only one reality and for my money God has described the key pieces to the puzzle in the Holy Bible - ymmv but again only one reality truly...
Possibly you’re still miffed that I never responded in a prior thread from last Friday. So here’s a few more thoughts for you to chew on regarding long ages...
Debunking people and websites is child’s play compared to debunking accepted facts.
Radio-isotope dating: I am not arguing decay rates. Sure they are uniform when measured under normal conditions. But we don’t have instruments to measure decay rates when these clocks are most likely reset - extreme temperature and pressure - usually vulcanic - or maybe a global flood.
Why do you think the 1980 Mt. St. Helens blind age dating tests could produce rocks over a million years old according to these tests?
Long ages and evolution has done more to shake peoples faith in God’s Word in our day. Science can never follow the scientific method when history is involved - most esp. when longer and longer historical ages are involved.
God created light before the stars sounds like an impossibility but when taken at it’s simplest it means the light is always older than the star it eminates from.
Also Einstein posited and proved gravitational time dilation. God says the Earth is the center of it all [I assume Universe here not solar system]. For me it makes sense that the center of the universe contains much more mass that the fringes which may in fact be expanding at or execeeding the speed of light.
I write code for a living. The cleanest code has clearly known assumptions, but the vast majority has to be implemented with many assumptions in place and most are not even identified as such. Science is much the same.
If the Earth is really that millions or billions of years old then it means the original sin of Adam and Eve did not bring death and decay into the whole of creation - I assure you when God says his 6 day creation was good it means perfect, spotless, flawless ~ no death nor decay of any kind.
I’m OK with agreeing to disagree, but I’ve learned we are all on very shaky ground when anything clearly contradicts what God has said. The end times will be similar to the days before Noah entered the Ark.
Just ponder these thoughts and continue reading God’s Word. I not worried about any true believers nor the destiny but I am greatly concerned for those who currently follow and believe the father of all liars.
I don't understand the point. You reject applying empirical scientific methods to the problem, arguing that things like physical constants can't be assumed to have been constant back then because they weren't observed, so none of those rules and laws apply. They you try to come up with theories that are consistent with some empirical scientific principle to make it sound scientifically plausible by the same standards you've already rejected.
I’m not arguing against empirical science nor the 6 constants of the physical universe - just trying to tell you there are many ‘roadsigns’ modern secular science misreads - whether it is willful or not - most of the bias in introduced by those who love money and do not care to credit nor worship the one true God. Modern secular science, like the democrats and the msm, think they don’t need God. The most pride-filled think they’ve dis-proven God emphatically!
Again there’s not much empiricism in any historical science - the further back you try to go the more swag [scientific wild a—ed guess]. My money on who the “flat-earther’s society” rests with the learned ‘experts’ of that day [not many, if any, true christians].
Heck, God [old testament reference to Psalms] and even BC science [pre-dating Jesus Christ] indicates the knowledge of Earth as a sphere.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.