Noahs' Ark- Better than New?

So says you. What's the proof about all this again?

 

Look at the photo and you can clearly see the Ark parting the earth. This was rather recently remember. So after all these years the Ark is still strong enough withstand sailing a landslide!

This photo is all the evidence one needs. Just look at the evidence. You can easily see she is structurally "operational", at least concerning the major structural members

...Even left a nice calm slick of "calm ground" off the port side of the vessel.

 

well, go there and fetch the thing and d whatever you want with it then.

 

Here is a marine survey done on the Ark.

http://www.barry.warmkessel.com/windsor2.html#14

 

I try and remain optimistic.

 

kinda seems like you got your beer glasses on again cause I'm seeing a smudge and a rock outcropping. We had earlier discussed neolithic villages of similar characteristics as the site in question. Deal is nothing of what your describing is actually visible in the pictures your presenting.

If thats really the best pictures that can be presented as "proof" of an ark then I think its case closed on this one as well as on ole Abe's alter.

 

The ark was real even if you can't prove or disprove it. Some things we take on faith. Give it a rest Boston. It would be no skin off your nose if the ark is real, would it? What will you have lost? I believe the ark exists unless a bunch of atheists burned it as they tried before.

 

when one makes extraordinary claims then one needs extraordinary proof

if one wants to believe in the ark that's one thing but when one presents it as fact to others, then the others have a right to question the facts presented

 

Nothing
no skin of my nose at all
but if someone points to a rock and says "hey I found Whozamajiggies alter" I"m likely to ask why he thinks its an alter and what makes him think its Whozamajiggies

I studied a lot of history so I like to keep things straight and within perspective

How about some better pictures and some form of rational explanation as to what qualifies this thing as an ark.

what ever happened to the virtue of critical and informed thinking

the questions where honest ones and I'd still be really curious to know how the church dated this site given that they have rejected every scientific dating method yet devised

 

What you are actually trying to say is:

[.......I believe the ark myth is real even if you CAN DISPROVE it.....]

I'd contend that it has very thoroughly disproven.

The Ark myth is an allegory of faith and resulting salvation, it's not a fact except in the minds of believers. There's so much dishonesty from the Fundametalist Christian movement regarding the worldwide flood that you will have been exposed to a lot of misinformation.

Also I'm curious from the same allegory, do you currently believe the laws of physics altered after a supposed worldwide flood, and before there was no refraction or reflection of light ?
You'd have to believe that wouldn't you it's an important part of the world wide flood myth?

 

She actually did a 240 degree spin before she stopped at the current spot.

Why must I argue when I have presented a marine survey of the Ark? This is a national monument with a visitors center and everything you can visit when in Turkey. I am sure they have a brochure at the airport "Come See the Ark".

What I want to "prove" is that the Ark was a highly sophisticated megaship that was built to handle the worst seas ever imaginable. This hullform, since it was designed using the mathamatic formulations of Phi/Golden ratio, is the perfection of beauty concerning her intended purpose. YOU COULD NOT DESIGN A BETTER ARK...it is conforming to a perfect standard.

It is a perfect NACA foil section in the horizontal and vertical. She was not anything like the tall squarish "houseboat" as portrayed. She was super sleek with a very low profile. The cabintop was very narrow as well. 138 ft beam, 30 ft high, 515 ft long, the perfect foil section. Imagine a 515 foot fishing spoon with a shell and a sliver of a cabintop.

 

Do you have verified carbon dating
Does the church now accept carbon dating
if so is it willing to admit that most relics are fakes based on this form of dating

Do you have any independent studies by nonsecular researchers confirming the structure is manufactured and that it is most likely an ark

Is there any evidence of it having housed a variety of animals within the context of its historical use.

Do the materials of the structure all date to the same period indicating that it was in fact built at a certain time and place rather than its just being another geological feature which gradually came to being through natural processes

just a few honest questions

cheers
B

 

Would you rather be standing on the red dot or the yellow dot during an earthquake and the stream started flowing?

I mean honestly, if we were there and the earth started shaking would you not be running into it?

 

Hell no
Ild be heading for high ground

the whole hill side would land right on that thing whatever it is in case of any large movements

I'm still hoping you address some of my questions

there is no indication of "spinning" that I can see, maybe you have some evidence of its previous position that we can look at