Noahs Ark Found!...Well, what if it is? Does this validate Bible 'Stories'

In paid talks, I have given all the caveats you give too, plagues, wars, famine, natural disasters, etc. but even then, the world population would be in the quadrillions and not the billions we have. remember the name John Nash (a beautiful mind...) I asked his people direct and they had no answer for me.

At 2,000-3,000 people, we would have died off and in a way you have proven my numbers. So for 4 BILLION YEARS, mankind hasn't grown more than it has? Why are parts of Africa without soil content to grow, yet in American in such a short time, we already have areas that have lost their soil content to grow. 4 billion years, and you have no yard stick to measure this and don't say Carbon-14 because after a few millenniums there is a discrepancy....

Man, one on one, I'd love to debate you.

Moes Tavern wrote:

In paid talks, I have given all the caveats you give too, plagues, wars, famine, natural disasters, etc. but even then, the world population would be in the quadrillions and not the billions we have. remember the name John Nash (a beautiful mind...) I asked his people direct and they had no answer for me.

At 2,000-3,000 people, we would have died off and in a way you have proven my numbers. So for 4 BILLION YEARS, mankind hasn't grown more than it has? Why are parts of Africa without soil content to grow, yet in American in such a short time, we already have areas that have lost their soil content to grow. 4 billion years, and you have no yard stick to measure this and don't say Carbon-14 because after a few millenniums there is a discrepancy....

Man, one on one, I'd love to debate you.

Quit bringing facts into this conversation!

Moes Tavern wrote:

In paid talks, I have given all the caveats you give too, plagues, wars, famine, natural disasters, etc. but even then, the world population would be in the quadrillions and not the billions we have. remember the name John Nash (a beautiful mind...) I asked his people direct and they had no answer for me.

At 2,000-3,000 people, we would have died off and in a way you have proven my numbers. So for 4 BILLION YEARS, mankind hasn't grown more than it has? Why are parts of Africa without soil content to grow, yet in American in such a short time, we already have areas that have lost their soil content to grow. 4 billion years, and you have no yard stick to measure this and don't say Carbon-14 because after a few millenniums there is a discrepancy....

Man, one on one, I'd love to debate you.

Do you really think that anyone believes humans have been around for 4 billion years?

Got me. My cell phone spells out what it thinks I'm writing. Good call/catch. Maybe it's this whole Obama budget. A million, a billion, a trillion, sooner or later it'll add up to big money....

daniel . wrote:

The Iliad is actually a good example of the opposite. There is little reason to question the conflict taking place. But just because it may accurately depict history, it doesn't mean Athena and Apollo etc were swooping down from the heavens to influence battles.

I could write a truthful diary for 20 years but if I broke into the part about my flying dragon, I think I'd be held to a higher standard of accountability.

This.

I think that most people believe that the flood story in the Bible combines an account of an extraordinarily large flood in Mesopotamia with a mysticized account of why it happened, in the same way as other local flood stories. There's no reason to believe that "the whole world" as those people would have understood it is the same as "the whole world" as we understand it.

First, it's debatable whether the earth contains enough water to cover the earth in the first place - creation "scientists" have speculated that the world was very flat with no significant mountains, but there's no evidence that this was the case as little as 6000 years ago. Apparently the writer of Genesis had some concept of mountains being present before the flood.

Secondly, if we take a world that looks like what we have today, the water must have risen about 30 feet per hour - this would cause massive upheaval for fish and other marine life that was not aboard the ark with many being buried at higher water levels. The fossil record doesn't support this sort of massive world-wide event.

Third, it's less believable not because it was found in the Bible, but because many people are very emotionally invested in "proving the Bible true". I posted a link earlier where an archaeologist has seen inconsistencies in the photographs and has heard local rumors that the wood was brought in. It wouldn't be the first time that someone has tried to forge a Biblical discovery. Also many who go about trying to prove it, start with what they "know" from the Bible and try to make the evidence fit. Take this paragraph from

- Because of our understanding of the Flood from the Scriptures, we might expect to find human fossils in Flood strata, so it is rather surprising, at first glance, that we don't find any. However, Scripture (backed up by so much other evidence) is very clear that there was a global Flood and the pre-Flood people were destroyed, so there must obviously be an explanation for this lack of human fossils. There is no way that these people could change their mind about the hypothesis that they've already accepted as fact. Can you blame people for being suspicious that they'll try anything to prove themselves right?

Moes Tavern wrote:

At 2,000-3,000 people, we would have died off and in a way you have proven my numbers.

You are assuming populations grow...and grow and grow and grow? Why? Where does this come from?

I look at what was the case 85k years ago, and what is the case now. Increasing rates of population growth from low minimal levels.

But you believe people pumped out loads of babies that all lived, who had babies etc etc.

What leads you to believe this is the case? Have the San/!Kung bushmen seen a population explosion?

A common mistake people make all the time - they look for facts to confirm what they WANT to be reality.

They found an old boat or other object made of wood. There's no indication that it held all the animals on earth, and honestly it makes no sense to believe that. YOU are making the leap in assuming that any old boat found in a given area is a specific boat mentioned in a specific story and not any f***ing boat.

Let's be real: there is no way in hell Noah put every type of animal on earth on his ark. There probably was some kind of large flood in the area at the time, and there may even have been a guy who put a bunch of animals on a boat. But you are the one making the leap here, not us. You're assuming that this boat is the one, when of course there were many thousands of boats. If you found an old house in Virginia would you assume it was George Washington's?

Your weird reference to carbon dating is confusing to me. Do you just not understand how carbon dating works? It's a reliable method based on sound logic and confirmed repeatedly. Rational people don't "worship" carbon dating (or science), but understand it is a useful tool, one of many.

Get a TV screenwriter to draw up a manuscript for your idea and propose it to producers with money for your ideas. It's worked for me all these years !

Like Jesus, Noah was a black man so WGAF ?

Homo sapiens have been around for a few hundred thousand years

The Toba catastrophe likely reduced the human population to around 10,000 individuals 70,000 years ago.

God said to Noah, there's gonna be a floody floody

Get those children out of the muddy muddy

Noah, he builded, he builded an arky arky

Called his children into the arky arky

It rained poured

for forty long daysies daysies

Rained and poured

for forty long daysies daysies

Nearly drove those animals crazy crazy

So rise and shine

and give god the glory glory

rise and shine

and give god the glory glory

You left out a verse:

The animals, the animals

They came in by twosies twosies

Animals, the animals

They came in by twosies twosies

Elephants and kangaroosies roosies

Children of the Lord

umm, you could be talking about the same event. OK, so you are off a few years. Bad barbon dating, can castorphic (sic) events have something to do with that?

The world's population was down to a mere few... same event?

Hey, Mr. on the runs, don't be so smug. You both might be right, you dumbass.

agnostic guy wrote:

Deez nuts,

Let's see your evidence. Even the Rational Faith guy demonstrated compelling stats.

Oh man, rational faith guy are you f'ing with me? I wish I had time to explain but I'm sure a little bit of internet research on evolution could pull something up.

I guess I will have to concede. Damn you Jesus. You win again.

Seriously people, NOAHS ARK? What is this fantasy world? I mean come on, next those Christians are going to say we spontaneously erupted from a sea of elements in some arbitrarily long amount of time! I mean really, I don't even believe we exist right now because it's impossible for us to exist, know what I mean? It's just easier to believe we never existed imo.

sorry for all the typos. I need to wear my glasses!!

So did Noah discover Australia to get the koalas and kangaroos, as well as all the species in the rainforest that we are still discovering today?

Not spontaneously erupted. Carefully made (molded) in His image. Or, the PC version, Carefully made in Her/His image.

I don't even know, or really even care if it is Noah's boat, or someone else's boat...maybe it isn't even a boat at all. Is it actually Noah's boat? For me to believe so, I will need a more proof than what is currently provided.

The only point I am trying to make is that if this artifact had nothing to do with the Bible/God, it [and the story that goes behind it] would be more readily accepted amongst non-christians, and that one of the reasons that they readily denounce it is to discredit the Bible.