Was The story of Noah real?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Teen9
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Heck, I googled it. The only two articles were from a young earth Creation website and one written by one of the “world’s leading cryptozoologists”.
 
As far as the water is concerned. There is also, piezo contraction and rock and soil matter has been recorded to become like liquid during an earthquake. People have witnessed the ground moving like waves on the ocean. There is something in the study of physics that does not make sense. Apparently, matter can contract and expand in colossal volumes and no scientist is mentioning this. The flood would have involved a world wide earthquake.
 
It’s a difficult thing to reconcile. Even if Noah only took two of each species of animal, the size of the ark as described in the Bible would not have been anywhere near large enough to house them all. And how do you explain the distinctly different animals that populate the different continents? I understand that God is in control, but it’s still curious to me.
 
Originally there was only one type of dog. Now there is about 400 different breeds of dogs. All of these dogs were bred within about the last 500 years. The same goes with birds, horses, and other animals. Micro evolution is real.
 
RuthAnne said:
It’s a difficult thing to reconcile. Even if Noah only took two of each species of animal, the size of the ark as described in the Bible would not have been anywhere near large enough to house them all. And how do you explain the distinctly different animals that populate the different continents? I understand that God is in control, but it’s still curious to me.
Click to expand...
Only if you think every species we see today were needed to repopulate. How many do you think were necessary to be on the ark to see the diversity today?
 
Last edited:
I don’t have a strong opinion and I’m no expert. But at the rate that species evolve and new animals are created, it couldn’t have happened in this short of time without divine intervention.

Not taking sides on this. Just stating my curiousities.
 
buffalo said:
40.png
niceatheist:
We might be (depending on where you live). But the Andes, Rockies and Himalayas? Sorry, it doesn’t sum up.
Click to expand...
How tall was the highest mountain at the time of the flood and where is the empirical evidence to support it?
Click to expand...
Per a quick Google search, mt. Everest is currently 29,029’ tall, and is growing at a rate of 2.4" / year.

Assuming the flood happened around 10,000 years ago, and assuming a fairly constant rate of growth for Everest:

2.4" / 12 ("/’) = 0.2’/year
10,000 * 0.2 = 2,000’

Therefore, assuming these factors, Everest was still a whopping 27,029’ above sea level.
Let’s do a little bit more math!

The current weight of the Earth is 5.972x10^24 kg.

Convert 27,029’ to meters: 8,238.44m (Minimum amount of water needed to cover Everest)

Seal level to sea level, the Earth is nominally, 12.742 million meters thick.

In order to calculate the volume of water necessary to engulf the entire earth in water to the point of covering Mt. Everest, we’ll take the volume of a sphere that’s:

12,742,000m + 2(8,238.44m) = 12,758,476.88m

r= 6,379,238.44m
So the volume of that sphere would be: 1.08741x10^21 m^3

Subtract the volume of the Earth (approx):
r = 12,742,000/2 = 6,371,000m
Volume: ~ 1.08321 x 10^21 m^3

That leaves us with 0.0042 x 10^21 m^3, or 4.2 x 10^18 m^3

Or: 4,200,000,000,000,000,000 cubic meters of water.

The weight of a single cubic meter of water is 1000kg, or exactly 1 ton.

Weight of the Earth:

5.972x10^24 kg.
5,972,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
4,200,000,000,000,000,000
or less than one-one-hundred-thousandth of a percent… 7.032 x 10^-7…
0.0000007032%…

Huh.

I’ll be honest, I expected this to wind up a much larger percentage of the Earth’s weight.

Well, I didn’t prove the point I thought I would, but this was a fun exercise none-the-less.
One other thing to consider though, is the pressure.

Water pressure increases at a rate of 1 atmosphere per ten meters of depth.

That means that, at “ground level”, the water pressure would have been ~834 atmospheres. 1 atmosphere = 14.5 psi, so 834 atmospheres is 12,093 psi. That means that over every inch of Earth (at seal level), the water would be exerting roughly the weight of a school bus. Nothing ,not even the plants, would be able to survive that. It would literally make the world barren…
 
Last edited:
The fact that atheism uses science to deceive has been proven. One topic is the global warming pseudo science.
 
That took me like, half an hour, with a calculator. Hardly quick >_>

It was fun though. I honestly expect the water weight to be so insanely height that it was unthinkable, but I was wrong… It’s really hard to visualize just how short things like Everest are on the scale of the planet.
 
Last edited:
Except that this requires a level of evolution beyond anything we could envision.
 
The mountain could have grown slowly over the course of time.
 
And so they did, on the order of centimeters a year, not kilometers.
 
RuthAnne said:
I don’t have a strong opinion and I’m no expert. But at the rate that species evolve and new animals are created, it couldn’t have happened in this short of time without divine intervention.
Click to expand...
Yes, it could and did. Environmental niches are rapidly filled by design and adaptation.
 
Not that quickly, no . You’re invoking a degree of evolution beyond all reason.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top