|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 2876 days) Posts: 564 From: The city of God Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Something BIG is coming! (AIG trying to build full sized ark) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
The existence of this article strongly suggests that the reviews were mainly for doctrinal acceptability and did not consider such niceties as the rationalist of the arguments.
The pseudonymous Woodmorappe disposes of an argument which explains how the Earth can be as warm as it is, if it is old, in the following way:
The ‘solution’ to the problem cannot work if the earth is not old.
He even claims that it "begs the question" on this feeble ground ! Apparently Woodmorappe and his reviewers are unaware of the fact that to "beg the question" means that the conclusion must be the same as one of the premises. For those who can't see the failure of reasoning, the PROBLEM is to show how the heat can be accounted for IF the earth is old. It is hardly a criticism to say that the solution only works in the situations where it is required ! Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9076 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.7 |
Someone here must know some engineers and by extension some engineers familiar with marine applications. I would like to get a legitimate review of the article.
Should I blindly email some engineering depts at Universitys that have engineering schools that deal with marine aspects? Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9076 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.7 |
This is also telling.
quote:Journal of Creation writing guidelines They accept anything as long as it deals with biblical creation. I have a feeling the same editor that reviews articles on chemistry also reviews articles on law. I mean why wouldn't it be the same editor. The only important thing is that it matches the apologetics and doctrine of the magazine. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Gullwind1 Junior Member (Idle past 4431 days) Posts: 12 Joined: |
I attended a Maritime college, and while I'm not a marine engineer (I studied the deck operations side of things) I can tell you that the biggest problem with a wooden ship the size of the ark isn't the design, its the structural strength of the wood.
Ships have a lot of forces acting on them, even in calm waters. They depend on their buoyancy being fairly evenly distributed. Wave action will cause one or both ends of the ship to be lifted, resulting in the buoyancy of the center to be reduced, since the water isn't supporting it as much. This is known as "sagging". As the wave moves down the hull, it lifts the center, reversing the stresses. Now the bow and stern have reduced support, a situation called "hogging". This repeats over and over, with every wave that passes the ship. Wood construction vessels have a practical limit as to how long they can be. The longer the vessel, the greater the stress. Wooden vessels longer than 300-400 feet have serious problems in waves. A 450' wooden barge could simply not be built strong enough to withstand the stresses of hogging and sagging. Wood just isn't that strong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Did the tone of Dr, Sarfati's response seem a bit testy to you? A quick internet search turns up a number of examples of the good doctor's responses to critics and criticism.
I would not make to much of the Dr. adding his title. You did call him Mr. in your email, when it would have been fairly easy to check. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Edited by NoNukes, : Address dr.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 735 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
Hi, Gullwind! Welcome aboard, so to speak!
Wood just isn't that strong. Cue creationist blather about "but this was gopherwood! You don't know how strong gopherwood was!"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Gullwind1 Junior Member (Idle past 4431 days) Posts: 12 Joined: |
Coragyps writes: Hi, Gullwind! Welcome aboard, so to speak! Thanks!
Cue creationist blather about "but this was gopherwood! You don't know how strong gopherwood was!" Just one more miracle added to the pile.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9076 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.7 |
Yes quite testy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9076 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.7 |
I would not make to much of the Dr. adding his title. You did call him Mr. in your email, when it would have been fairly easy to check. Why would he expect me to know his credentials? That in itself is fairly pompous. I know a few Dr's, medical and PHD's. The only ones that would point out in a situation like this that they were Dr's are the assholes. In his original response he signed it as Jonathan Sarfati. In his second email he went out of his way to highlight Dr. It was obviously an attempt to try to make the impression of expertise and authority and possibly an attempt to try to be intimidating. If not why would he do it like this
quote: Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Theodoric writes:
Why would he expect me to know his credentials? That in itself is fairly pompous. Pompous, perhaps. But the dude is fairly well known in some circles. I doubt you were intimidated. When I see a PhD, I'm simply motivated to figure out what the actual area of expertise is. In this case though, Dr. Safarti is not claiming to have reviewed the paper.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ZenMonkey Member (Idle past 4511 days) Posts: 428 From: Portland, OR USA Joined: |
slevesque writes: I did; I don't think it answers my question. What it shows, quote: Which means that it starts off in the position of a sailing ship that's been dismasted. Well, no, because it wasn't meant to sail, so it isn't a sailing ship. They clearly mention this in the introduction:
quote: So they evaluated that as a drifting ship, it could have navigated on waves as high as 30m. Note that this is using modern passenger ships criteria of what is 'navigable'.
Broaching to is when a ship turns side-on to the waves. In a storm, this was often fatal. That's why sails were required --- the ship had to be kept sailing in the direction of the wind, and if the sail or mast carried away, you were in trouble. Ok. And so the danger is to overturn ? Isn't that covered in the 'overturning stability' section ? If not, how do mastless ships (modern) deal with this ? Do they use their motors to align themselves continually, or can't you simply shape the boat so that it aligns itself naturally ? Yes, modern mastless ships have to use their engines to be able to run before the wind. If they broach, then they roll and capsize, which is not specifically too good. A number of possibilities present themselves. 1. The ark had masts. Now you have to add the labor of atually manning the masts and stearing to the labor of tending to all those animals. 2. The ark was a mastless barge. And it rolled. And sank. 3. The ark had engines. Not mentioned in scripture, but then again, it doesn't say that Noah didn't have engines. 4. The ark was an airship and floated above the waves. Or was actually a building and sat atop a mountain. Not really scripturally supported either. 5. The seas remained perfectly calm, despite 40 days and 40 nights of rainfall sufficient to cover the earth. 6. God magically kept the ark afloat, in which case why bother with all this real-world modeling and caluculating? If you can come up with any others, I'd be interested to hear about it. If you add in the fact that a wooden boat that large is going to buckle whenever it spans the trough between two waves, I'll go ahead and take the position that you can a priori say that that boat won't float. I have no time for lies and fantasy, and neither should you. Enjoy or die. -John Lydon Reality has a well-known liberal bias.-Steven Colbert I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it.- John Stuart Mill
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tram law Member (Idle past 4705 days) Posts: 283 From: Weed, California, USA Joined: |
If I was multi billionaire I would definately build one to spec and see if it would actually float and see if it could actually hold all those animals and the supplies it would take to feed them.
3... 2...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
MelissaDaisy99  Suspended Junior Member (Idle past 4661 days) Posts: 1 Joined: |
Wonderful! thanks for the info that you guys have been discussing. Awesome!!!!
__________________
watch movies online free Edited by Admin, : Spamify signature.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Scantlings were posted at Message 58. I don't understand them at all, but FWIW.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi MiguelG, just a quick quibble
A barge is eminently 'seaworthy' in calm weather even in deep water though it is usually used in coastal and riverine environments. Curiously, this is not what seaworthy means.
quote: Included by inference is the ability to handle storms that normally occur at sea and sever weather that occasionally occurs -- being able to survive and operate in something like 90% of all weather conditions. Mariners take safety at sea as a highly critical aspect of their occupation -- many times you don't get a second chance. Now back to the humorous (and pointless) discussion. Enjoy. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024