Noah's ark found

[jezr74]

My dear old dad used to call these things , Noah's Arks.
When we used to go to the beach , he'd say "Watch out for the Noah's".
Bit of Aussie rhyming slang for you there.

I remember being out on the reef and they would use this as a reference to sharks between boats. The tourists would be none the wiser.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Somewhere on a dusty vhs I have a detailed look at the Noah's Ark mythos, which traced it back through stories from other regional cultures, right back to some Sumarian or Babylonian tale of a sheep trader who got swept down river and out to sea by the spring floods, who when he got back to shore was 100 miles or so from where he started and began anew. If I find it when I'm digging through the archives I'll post the name.

 

[grumpywolfman]

I think that the main argument for people comes back down to a Creation Vs. Evolution debate, before they are even willing to accept the possibility that this is indeed a genuine archeological discovery. I uploaded a video that I hope that you all will make the time to watch. It's a presentation by Dr. Hovind at the University of West Florida with question and answer exchanges as the anthropology class was shown the creation view of history. Please forward the video to .40 to to fast forward past the Youtube subscriber's introduction. The subjects of creation, evolution, and dinosaurs are discussed. Please watch the video in its entirety before leaving comments ~ thank you.

[video=youtube_share;G97LNX5KVcI]http://youtu.be/G97LNX5KVcI[/video]

 

[Dirty Dog]

No, sorry, I'm not going to watch a 3 hour video on the already completely debunked creation myths.

Try a simple question: how did Noah fit a breeding pair of a few million different species in his little wooden boat?

 

[Xue Sheng]

Try a simple question: how did Noah fit a breeding pair of a few million different species in his little wooden boat?

It was really...Really...... REALLY....BIG

You just won't believe how vastly hugely mindbogglingly big it was... that and he forgot the unicorns

 

[elder999]

I think that the main argument for people comes back down to a Creation Vs. Evolution debate, before they are even willing to accept the possibility that this is indeed a genuine archeological discovery.

No. Flood is one thing, Creation v. Evolution another....though dinosaurs missing the boat fits kind of well with the whole "young earth" idiocy.

I uploaded a video that I hope that you all will make the time to watch. It's a presentation by Dr. Hovind at the University of West Florida with question and answer exchanges as the anthropology class was shown the creation view of history. Please forward the video to .40 to to fast forward past the Youtube subscriber's introduction. The subjects of creation, evolution, and dinosaurs are discussed. Please watch the video in its entirety before leaving comments ~ thank you.[/QUOTE[

No.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind

[Kent E. Hovind (born January 15, 1953) is an American young Earth creationist. Hovind has spoken on creation science and has aimed to convince listeners to reject theories of evolution, geophysics, and cosmology in favor of his interpretation of the Genesis creation narrative from the Bible. Hovind's views are contradicted by scientific evidence and some of his ideas have also been criticized by young Earth creationist organizations such as Answers in Genesis.
Hovind established the Creation Science Evangelism in 1991, and frequently spoke on young Earth creationism at seminars at private schools and churches, debates, and on radio and television broadcasts. Since January 2007, Hovind has been serving a ten-year prison sentence after being convicted of 58 federal counts, including 12 tax offenses, one count of obstructing federal agents, and 45 counts of structuring cash transactions. He is incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institution at Berlin, New Hampshire.

Try harder.

 

[arnisador]

Dr. Hovind

Kent Hovind is a well-known scientific crank. Completely debunked. His alleged Ph.D. was by correspondence from an unaccredited diploma mill. Citing him shows a complete ignorance of the basic tenets of scientific inquiry.

 

[arnisador]

It was really...Really...... REALLY....BIG

You just won't believe how vastly hugely mindbogglingly big it was...

Well, it was certainly powered by improbability, that's for sure.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Well, it was certainly powered by improbability, that's for sure.

The first time the Ark ever crossed the Ocean the massive improbability field it generated caused two-hundred-and-thirty-nine thousand lightly-fried eggs to materialize in a large, wobbly heap on the famine-struck lands of the Montes of Mars. The whole Martian people had just died out from famine, except for one man who died of cholesterol-poisoning some weeks later.

Noah: Here I am, brain the size of a planet and he asks me to ferry a bunch of fur balls around. Call that job satisfaction? 'Cos I don't."

 

[K-man]

Actually, the Noah's Ark story confirms evolution. Through one family we got all the different races of the world, and all the different skin colours. Black, brown, white, yellow, red etc. or am I just being cynical? By the way, the story of this fantastic discovery didn't make it to our news services. I wonder why?

 

[seasoned]

"Reality" always has a way of knocking that "by faith" thing all to ****. Oh well.

 

[Jon-Bhoy]

 

[grumpywolfman]

Jon-Bhoy I was courteous enough to watch your video before I posted my comment, I hope that you would be "evolved" enough to do the same for me?

 

[Jon-Bhoy]

I see what you did there. "evolved", thats humor. Yes I watched it.

*Edit- Ive seen it before, And Ive seen the same gentleman on another series about Noah's ark,

 

[Dirty Dog]

Jon-Bhoy I was courteous enough to watch your video before I posted my comment, I hope that you would be "evolved" enough to do the same for me?

Do you really think that watching a 1:40 comedy clip is comparable to sitting through a 3 HOUR video of a criminal with bogus academic credentials blathering about totally debunked creation myths?

 

[grumpywolfman]

No, sorry, I'm not going to watch a 3 hour video on the already completely debunked creation myths.

Try a simple question: how did Noah fit a breeding pair of a few million different species in his little wooden boat?

Simple answer: watch the videos before posting your questions

 

[grumpywolfman]

Do you really think that watching a 1:40 comedy clip is comparable to sitting through a 3 HOUR video of a criminal with bogus academic credentials blathering about totally debunked creation myths?

You are trying to attack me instead of taking the time and watch the videos and then make a comment.

 

[grumpywolfman]

I see what you did there. "evolved", thats humor. Yes I watched it.

*Edit- Ive seen it before, And Ive seen the same gentleman on another series about Noah's ark,

Have you watched Ron Wyatt's excavation that I originally posted?

 

[Dirty Dog]

Simple answer: watch the videos before posting your questions

Don't have an answer, eh?

Again, I'm not wasting three hours of my life watching a video of a criminal with bogus academic credentials blather on about totally debunked creation myths.

You are trying to attack me instead of taking the time and watch the videos and then make a comment.

Nonsense. If you can find anyplace where I have attacked you, please hit the Report to Moderator button. It's the triangle shaped button in the lower left corner.

I've already seen more than enough credible research that debunks the creation myths your criminal source tries pass off as truth. I am not wasting another three hours. Unless I need a nap, of course.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah's_Ark#Historicity[h=2]Historicity[/h] [h=3]Ark's geometrics[/h]In Europe, the Renaissance saw much speculation on the nature of the ark that might have seemed familiar to early theologians such as Origen and Augustine. At the same time, however, a new class of scholarship arose, one which, while never questioning the literal truth of the Ark story, began to speculate on the practical workings of Noah's vessel from within a purely naturalistic framework. In the 15th century, Alfonso Tostada gave a detailed account of the logistics of the ark, down to arrangements for the disposal of dung and the circulation of fresh air. The 16th-century geometrician Johannes Buteo calculated the ship's internal dimensions, allowing room for Noah's grinding mills and smokeless ovens, a model widely adopted by other commentators.[SUP][15][/SUP]
Various editions of the Encyclopædia Britannica reflect the collapse of belief in the historicity of the ark in the face of advancing scientific knowledge. Its 1771 edition offered the following as scientific evidence for the ark's size and capacity: "...Buteo and Kircher have proved geometrically, that, taking the common cubit as a foot and a half, the ark was abundantly sufficient for all the animals supposed to be lodged in it...the number of species of animals will be found much less than is generally imagined, not amounting to a hundred species of quadrupeds". By the eighth edition (1853–1860), the encyclopedia said of the Noah story, "The insuperable difficulties connected with the belief that all other existing species of animals were provided for in the ark are obviated by adopting the suggestion of Bishop Stillingfleet, approved by Matthew Poole...and others, that the Deluge did not extend beyond the region of the Earth then inhabited". By the ninth edition, in 1875, no attempt was made to reconcile the Noah story with scientific fact, and it was presented without comment. In the 1960 edition, the article on the ark stated that "Before the days of 'higher criticism' and the rise of the modern scientific views as to the origin of the species, there was much discussion among the learned, and many ingenious and curious theories were advanced, as to the number of animals on the ark".[SUP][24][/SUP]
[h=3]Species distribution[/h] By the 17th century, it was becoming necessary to reconcile the exploration of the New World and increased awareness of the global distribution of species with the older belief that all life had sprung from a single point of origin on the slopes of Mount Ararat. The obvious answer was that man had spread over the continents following the destruction of the Tower of Babel and taken animals with him, yet some of the results seemed peculiar. In 1646, Sir Thomas Browne wondered why the natives of North America had taken rattlesnakes with them, but not horses: "How America abounded with Beasts of prey and noxious Animals, yet contained not in that necessary Creature, a Horse, is very strange".[SUP][15][/SUP]
Browne, who was among the first to question the notion of spontaneous generation, was a medical doctor and amateur scientist making this observation in passing. However, biblical scholars of the time, such as Justus Lipsius (1547–1606) and Athanasius Kircher (c.1601–80), were also beginning to subject the Ark story to rigorous scrutiny as they attempted to harmonize the biblical account with the growing body of natural historical knowledge. The resulting hypotheses were an important impetus to the study of the geographical distribution of plants and animals, and indirectly spurred the emergence of biogeography in the 18th century. Natural historians began to draw connections between climates and the animals and plants adapted to them. One influential theory held that the biblical Ararat was striped with varying climatic zones, and as climate changed, the associated animals moved as well, eventually spreading to repopulate the globe.
There was also the problem of an ever-expanding number of known species: for Kircher and earlier natural historians, there was little problem finding room for all known animal species in the ark. Less than a century later, discoveries of new species made it increasingly difficult to justify a literal interpretation for the Ark story.[SUP][25][/SUP] By the middle of the 18th century only a few natural historians accepted a literal interpretation of the narrative.[SUP][26][/SUP]