Psychology looks at atheism and theism. Also, atheism is tenuous/non-existent/rare ..

quote:

---

LOOK and LIVE.

​

NOAH?S ARK Part 1.

​

Copyright Conditions.
[1] This work may be downloaded or copied in full only.
[2] No part or section of this work is to be added to, nor in part deleted.
[3] This work is not to be sold or traded.
Infringement of any Copyright Conditions can bring legal action.

​

Click to return to main Page.

​

WHAT WAS NOAH?S ARK
NOT
LIKE?

​

The book of Genesis tells us that Noah was commanded by God to build an Ark of gopher wood, covered within and without with pitch. (Gen.6:14). This construction was to be three hundred cubits in length, and fifty cubits beam, and thirty cubits high.. Now whether they be Royal, Babylonian, or Hebrew cubits it matters not for the vessel would have to be nearly, or just over, 500ft. long. A royal cubit is approx. 21 ins (52cms. approx.) long, and an ordinary cubit is 18 ins long (46cms. approx.). Now here is a problem. It is generally accepted by most, that the Ark was a barge-like, that is a buff bowed wooden structure which to me would have been a vessel most probably designed by a church committee. It being neither practical nor of much use, in fact it would be completely dangerous with a life span of only a few days in those wind driven waters. The reasons for my conclusions are as follows.

​

As having an amateur interest in boat design, I have found the zenith of timber ship design was from the middle to the end of last century. From past centuries of experience, timber ships underwent improved construction to the place of constantly and successfully braving open oceans. Trade and trade profits were the motives for this improved construction, and no motive could be stronger. Now the strength of a timber ship is in its keel, and only the stoutest of these last century timber ships were used to round Cape horn, possibly the worst waters in the world. The largest and most profitable of these trading vessels were the Windjammers, which were approx. 150 to 200ft.and maybe a little more, but not much more, in length. These vessels had not only one keel, but more. The trouble with a timber keel is that lengths of timber, of feet thickness, were not long enough for one piece so they had to be joined or scarfed, and where there is a scarf there is a weakness. But there was usually more than one keel. Underneath the main keel, was a false keel so as to absorb any damage and was replaceable, and above the keel was the keelson, usually as large or larger than the keel itself. This keelson was usually scarfed into the stem timbers and stern timbers. Some larger vessels also had side keels, one on each side of the main keel, and each also of large timbers. The scarfs were placed alternately for strength, as in brickwork, and thoroughly trunneled (a wooden dowel like peg which swelled when wet) or bolted together. And that was about as far as they could go using only timber. To repeat, the strength of any wooden ship is in its keel.

​

Now it stands to reason that to double the size of the ship, profits must increase enormously, while expenditures only increase but little. And on the basis that most of us are ambitious, this would surely have been tried. But to dramatically increase the size and length of timber ships over a certain point didn?t work, because it wouldn?t work The longest timber ship ever built is believed to be Donald McKay's five-masted, squared-rigged barque, `Great Republic', which was 335ft. in length, and 4,500 tons displacement. To repeat, there were no purely timber ships built beyond this length and size. Why? Because they were highly dangerous, in the fact that timber ships over these lengths could easily break-up in a sea, so they were never built! When iron and steel were introduced, this was a completely different matter.

​

David Fasold (The Discovery of Noah's Ark, page 263), tells us of the performance of the `Wyoming', a timber constructed six masted, schooner rigged ship of yellow pine, 329 ft. in length and 3730 tons displacement, designed by the American John Rockwell and built in 1909 by Percy and Small at Bath, Me. USA.. Built in a box like form, this vessel had a keel proper of two oak members each 15ins. X 14ins. Her keelson was just over 3ft. 6ins.in width and 7ft. high from the top of the floors, made up of fourteen yellow pine timbers, each 14ins. X 14ins., arranged in four tiers of three with two single tiers on top. The oak keel was below this, and the false keel below that. The whole framing of this ship was braced with iron straps. (**1).

​

Fasold, a master mariner himself, informs us that this class of ship was a failure became it became `deformed through hogging and sagging, and visibly undulated over the waves', with the result that they leaked badly and `were in constant need of pumping'. These ships were considered `unsafe for deep water' and only used for `short hauls in the coast trade'. Hogging is caused when a ship is in ballast, and because the upward pressure of the water is strongest at its widest point, the ship?s beam, and because timber is weakened at the scarf points, the keel in time is deformed and forced into a concave shape. This used to be a problem with all large timber ships. Sagging is when the keel is forced into a convex shape when continually fully loaded, but the sagging part would not have effected the Ark, but the hogging most probably would. At somewhere over the 200ft. mark, and under the 300 ft. mark, the timber ship had reached its safety limit. It must also be remembered that these ships were built for the stresses and strains of sail, that is with the latter vessels, their tall masts were well braced with very taunt wire shrouds, which could number on average 16 per mast to carry their clouds of sail. Standing rigging also braced mast to mast and from stem to stern, which on the whole strengthened the complete ship as does a suspension on a bridge. But in very heavy weather their sail area was drastically reduced, but the strength was still there. But the Ark was not built for sail!

​

So note all these points well, because these are SOLID FACTS and not scientific hypothesis!! To repeat, the ?Great Republic? was the longest timber ship ever built, because, beyond that length, timber ships were unstable and prone to break up in a seaway, and that makes them a danger to life, and that is a FACT!!

​

There were larger sailing ships such as the 361ft. five masted barque, ?France?, built in Scotland in 1890, and lost at sea in 1901, and there was a similar ship believed to be the longest sailing ship ever built, launched at Bordeaux, France, in 1911. It was 418 ft in length and of 5,633 gross tonnage, and wrecked in 1922. But these were not wooden vessels!

​

To compare with the above, a large iron ship the Great Eastern, designed by I.K.Brunel, 692ft. long and with a 82 1/2ft. beam and a 30ft. draft, with a gross tonnage of 18,914 tons, was first floated in 1858. This would make it well over a 100ft. longer than the Ark. She was an immensely strong iron built ship with a double bottom and a tubular upper deck. Iron and steel ships don?t need keels because of the high tensile strength and firm rigidity of these materials. It was propelled by paddle wheels, plus a four bladed screw, and six masts carrying sail. Unfortunately it was not an economic success, doing work for which it was not designed. Iron is strong and building ships of these lengths in later times were common, but the Ark was not built of iron!

​

To repeat, the Ark was NOT built of iron. It was built of wood. And if it were built on our Church committee design, there would be a disastrous weakness caused by wave undulation, a most serious hazard, and the bigger the wave the greater the undulation, so the Ark at nearly 500 ft. long and if built in this suggested way, would most certainly would be a very dangerous and unstable vessel indeed. These Windjammers were continually sent around the Cape Horn run , possibly the worst waters in the world, with Australian grain and with South American guano, so they had to be strongly built!. And even that didn?t stop the enormous losses! And these were sleek nosed vessels and definitely not the buff bowed type that would absorb the powerful ?thump? of a massive wave. To me this is a design of a Church committee! And again, the Scriptures tell us that ?God made a wind pass over the earth? (Gen.8:1). But wind, in this case the ?roaring forties?, generates waves, and where there is no land mass to block, massive waves are generated, exactly why the roaring Forties waves are so massive, and consistently dangerous!

​

Granted that in Noah?s time trees would have been much taller and stronger, but nevertheless the same principals apply, and the keel of a 500ft. ship would still have had to be scarfed! So a gopher wood ship could not have been the solid timber vessel so designed by our Church committee, but rather of some other wood-type materiel not affected by wave undulation! Modern giant steel tankers are now designed to cope with this wave undulation, and they DO undulate.

​

Then with a barge-like ship as illustrated, just imagine the mucking-out that would have to be done every day. An impossible task for 8 souls, for it would have to be done very regularly. If water were used to wash out the stalls, the only way for the water to go was down into the bilges. So the back breaking work of emptying the bilges by hand would have had to be a daily chore. And even so, the urine and dung accumulated, would have generated a methane gas. Now the Ark was a closed ship, and volatile methane gas plus a spark equals a massive explosion. I have seen a yacht, a closed boat, where LP. gas had leaked into the bilges, the result being an inevitable explosion. Devastating!

​

With these facts it is easily seen that Noah?s Ark was not a timber vessel as we knew them from last century, for its very length ruled out any type of vessel built after this way. So what was it like, and what was the ?gopher wood? of Genesis? Was it timber or was it of some other wood like materiel? See on to Noah?s Ark, study Two.

​

R.P. Tickle
PO. Box 381
Mooloolaba Q. 4557.
Australia.

​

BIBLIOGRAPHY.

​

(**1)
?Deep Water Sail?
Harrold Underhill 1952
Brown, Son & Ferguson Glasgow
Pg.236.

​

(**2).
`The Tigris Expeditions',
Thor Heyerdahl, 1980.
Geo. Allen & Unwin London.
Pgs.315-6, of the same book. Page 13.

​

(**4).
`The Discovery of Noah's Ark'
D. Fasold Page 21.

​

(**5).
`The Ra Expeditions'
Thor Heyerdahl,
(Allen and Unwin, London) Page 24.

​

taken from: http://www.lookandlive.com/...h%27s+ark%22+and+hogging&hl=en

---

quote:

---

LOOK and LIVE.

​

NOAH?S ARK Part 2.

​

WHAT WAS NOAH?S ARK REALLY LIKE?

​

Copyright Conditions.
[1] This work may be downloaded or copied in full only.
[2] No part or section of this work is to be added to, nor in part deleted.
[3] This work is not to be sold or traded.
Infringement of any Copyright Conditions can bring legal action.

​

Click to return to main Page.

​

THE BUILDING REED AND REED BOATS.

​

In ancient times from immemorial, reeds were used for construction of both houses and boats. The people of Southern Iraq living where the great rivers of the Tigris and Euphrates meet, even today live on berdi-reed islands, in domed dwellings also made of these reeds. They are built similar to open ended WW2 Quonset huts or aircraft hangers, very strong, and very easy to construct. People live in these same style huts today as did from ancient times. In fact the reed was as versatile to those living in Mesopotamia and Egypt, as was the Coconut palm to the Polynesians. It was used for making boats, sails, mats, cloth, cords, and later the Papyrus reed from Egypt was used for writing material. But most important, the inner pith was used for food, eaten either cooked or raw by humans and animals. In later years in Egypt, any person owning swamp land covered with growing papyrus was a rich man indeed. The Assyrians called Egyptian Papyrus; ?The reed of Egypt?, because it was different from the berdi-reed of Southern Iraq.

​

In Egypt and in Mesopotamia, as before explained, reeds were used in pre-dynastic building of houses. They were tied together tightly with cord and daubed with slime of pitch and/or mud for protection against the elements. Reeds were also used in roofing. In building the Tower of Babel, they certainly didn't use reeds, but then note its construction;

​

Gen.11:3. ... And they had brick for stone, and slime (Margin; bitumen) for mortar.

​

Bitumen, or pitch, was used extensively in building because it was plentiful and accessible.

​

The Egyptians, not forgetting their historical roots, used this theme of bundled reeds as building material, in splay and torus mouldings for decoration, on the tops of their stone columns in some temples. The reed played a very large role in early Egyptian and Babylonian history.

​

Thor Heyerdahl in his book `The Ra Expeditions' (**5), and `the Tigris Expedition' (**2), cover the extent and use of reed boats very well, as early distribution and usage of this type of boat was rather extensive. As he shows, they ranged in use from Sth. Iraq, Morocco, Algeria, Egypt, Sardinia, Lake Tana in Ethiopia, Lake Chad in central Africa, Mexico, and lake Titicaca in Peru, to Easter Island. But it was from early Egypt and Mesopotamia that they were built in size, and the Egyptian details were recorded and left for posterity.

​

One and two man fishing boats had no upturned ends, but the larger boats certainly did, as the ancient Aymara Indians of Lake Titicaca carried large stone blocks of many tons in weight on them across the lake to the ruined city of Tiahuanaco. But it is the recording, of all places, on the walls of the oldest ceremonial building on Easter Island, that there is a most amazing sight. It is a sickle shaped reed boat together with the sun symbols of Ra the sun god. Noting also that the sickle shaped reed boat was a sea-going vessel, and here is another amazing fact. The South American Indians, with all possible timber available, didn't use timber planked boats. Heyerdahl identifies the original (migrating) inhabitants of South America as the `Mochica' people, bearded men with Mediterranean features, with a knowledge of intricate stone, and mud-brick work as used in Mesopotamia and Egypt. These are the original migrants to South America who built the first large pyramids to the sun, and brought not only the knowledge of reed boat construction, but root clumps of the North American Totora reed, for propagation. These sickle shaped reed boats were repeatedly drawn into designs on their ceramics. To repeat, these original migrants were known for three important features.

​

?Knowledge of exacting work in very large stone, and also with mud brick with straw as building blocks.

​

?Knowledge of building stone constructed stepped pyramid with stairs leading to a temple at the apex, which is another study.

​

?Knowledge of building ocean going reed boats.

​

Heyerdahl reveals in his book `The Tigris Expedition', the combination of two of these features. That is the use of ocean going reed boats with upturned ends and their ancient trading ports, firstly at Bahrain in Kuwait, and also near Oman, at the ancient copper mine. These ports also had `mini, compact, stepped, sun-oriented pyramids, with lateral stairways that lead up to a temple on top'. Outside of South America, these were the only such pyramids with outside staircases leading up to a temple on top found outside of Mesopotamia. An important point to remember about pyramids.

​

But it is in Egypt that recording of these early reed boats is most interesting. The earliest known pictures of sailing craft are found on two Egyptian vases from very early times, and they both had distinctive upturned ends as do all sea-going reed boats. Bjorn Landstrom, a notable maritime historian, illustrates one of these early Egyptian boats as having 10 oars per side, a sail, and a reed deck house. Leather was used to cover the distinctive ends. But what is most interesting is this procedure was also incorporated into later timber boats.

​

This Egyptian design is prominent in the Solar cedar boat of Cheops, found in 1954 on the southern side of his great pyramid. This craft was built with interlocking cedar timber pieces, and had an overall length of 142ft., with a 9ft. beam. But it is most curious that the design was taken from the papyrus boat with distinctive upturned ends. Heyerdahl is emphatic on this point. Cheop's timber Solar boat's design was taken off the reed boat, and not the other way around. Pharaoh Cheops cedar solar boat designed to take him from one era to the next, was 142 ft. in length, with a 9 ft. beam, and rowed with 26ft. oars.

​

Heyerdahl built two of these reed boats, the first being 50ft. long with a 16ft. beam. But because of faulty construction this boat broke up just before reaching the West Indies. The second boat of 39ft. long and 16ft. beam, was constructed by two Aymara Indians from Lake Titicaca, and successfully completed the journey. But on both boats there was one common problem. The reeds absorbed water and after four months at sea there was little freeboard left. The boat sat very low in the water at the end of its journey. An important ingredient in construction was missing. The third boat, the Tigris, was 60ft. long, was made of the Berdi reed found in lower Iraq. This berdi reed cut in August proved to be less absorbent and after 5 months proved to be a better reed for boats. But Heyerdahl never covered any of his reed rafts with pitch or bitumen.

​

But going back to the construction of the large Egyptian reed boats, it is important to note that they had very religious overtones. Another very interesting point concerning the construction of this solar boat, is the copy, as Heyerdahl puts it, of a `Sharply in-curved stern'. Now the intriguing question is this. Early Egyptian river-boats were built for pomp and ceremony and definitely not constructed for open ocean use. Then from which pattern did they get this `sharply in-curved stern'? This is an open ocean design to effectively shoulder away passing seas, and offering least resistance to no-coming waves, as last century clipper ships dramatically proved. But the burning question was; Why this in-curved section at the stern, and not at the bow where the boat cuts the water and shoulders the waves? The flair is known as reserve buoyancy, to give lift from passing waves and are the properties of a sea-boat.

​

And again, the distinctively upturned bow and stern, Heyerdahl found, were especially effective in breaking the force of broken waves and whitecaps over the back, and riding out towering steep waves. The Clipper ships of last century were the first large ships to use this radical `sharply in-curved' construction in their bows, as they were designed for speed. The purpose was for knifing through oncoming waves to reduce the force of the wave upon the hull which reduces speed. The flared bow also produced lift as the bow buries into the wave, another reason for reserve buoyancy. But although these same bows are found on nearly all modern ships of today, the curious thing was that this in-curved section on the Egyptian reed boat was at the STERN. This design was to shoulder aside overtaking waves coming from BEHIND, but these Egyptian boats were built for use on the calm River Nile. In truth, this design was taken off another reed boat which had the original problem. The Egyptian Pharaohs certainly knew of such a ship which to them, had a deeply religious significance from which they tried to emulate, and that was the deliverance of privileged royalty from one life into the next, which was to copy Noah?s exploits. The ship they tried to emulate that went from one way of life to another, and that ship was Noah's Ark! And there was another construction idea that came from the Ark.

​

Supporting corner posts and structure posts of this large house built on the main deck of the Ark were set on large flat stones woven into the reed bundles. These large flat stones spread the bearing load of the corner posts so as not to put too much pressure on the reeds. This is understood in the usage of A frame masts, without the cross piece of the A, in later Egyptian large reed boats, as they had these poles, or masts stepped on large flat stones to effectively bear the pressure of masts and sail. It worked! But here is another question.

​

Did the mother of Moses copy some great event from years before, for the saving of her baby Moses? She certainly did!

​

Ex.2:3. And when she (Moses' mother) could no longer hide him, she took for him
an ark of bulrushes, and daubed it with slime and pitch, and put the child
therein; and she laid it in the flags (Papyrus reeds) by the river's brink.

​

Review; The salvation of the child Moses was an ark of bulrushes (reeds), daubed with pitch to make it water-tight.

​

Yes she did! She copied Noah's Ark! For God had commanded Noah;

​

Gen. 6:14. Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and
shall pitch it within and without with pitch.

​

And Noah did! For Gopher wood was a reed. Noah built an ark of reeds, over 500ft. long, and covered it within and without with pitch, and as we will discover, this pitch was the strength of the ship.

​

In his book `The Tigris Expedition', Heyerdahl on Page 34, (**2) quotes an intriguing quotation from the Epic of Gilgamesh. `Reed house, reed house, wall, wall, listen! Tear down your home and build a ship'. Most interesting.

​

He then quotes a researcher of ships and cargo of the Persian gulf, named Armas Salonen, who showed that the reed ships with high bow and stern, went back into pre-history in both Egypt and Mesopotamia, and both these countries definitely copied their timber boats from the original reed boat design. These reed boats with upturned ends were depicted on the earliest Sumerian cylinder seals. This early large reed boat was called a `May-Gur', or `God-ship', a sea going ship with upturned bow and stern, a ship used by the demi-gods and divine ancestors before Ur was settled.

​

Heyerdahl then concludes that his reed boat, the `Tigris', would have been classed as a `God-ship'. And although not ever said, he must have been thoroughly convinced that the Biblical Ark was a reed ship, yet he believed with ribs and then overlaid with reeds and then pitched. Curious when his own three ships were miniature replicas, be as it may without the `covering' of pitch of the original Ark.

​

Now let us recap. A timber ship of over 300ft. is dangerous at sea because it undulates in wave action, and with only the strength of timber it would undoubtedly break up in those mountainous seas that roared about the earth in Noah?s time when the winds began to blow. (Gen.8:1). And these winds and wind generated waves, which would have been enormous, and continued until the Ark came to rest upon Mt. Ararat.

​

The same applies to a ship made of reeds without the covering of pitch. It could not have endured such mountainous seas. For consider Heyerdahl?s 50 ft. reed boat! He tells us that it `undulated like a banana skin on a wave' and that it was like `sleeping on a sea-serpent'. But the point is that Heyerdahl?s second reed boat DIDN?T break up in ocean swells, but undulated with them! His problem was water absorption.

​

This boat had spray and rain channels down through the upper superstructure
to flush out animal wastes. There were no bilges for the wastes to flow into.

​

Not shown in the illustration below is the built in flared stern quarter to shoulder overtaking waves, exactly the opposite to modern ships of today which are built to shoulder off oncoming waves as they proceed through the water with speed, to quickly reach their destination.. This principal didn't matter with Pharaoh's river boat copy of the Ark , but it certainly did with the Ark itself and the seas which she encountered, for to reiterate, early Egyptian reed boats were a copy of Noah's Ark.

​

So comes the burning question. What then was the `pitch' with which the Ark was covered?

​

THE PITCH OR BITUMEN.

​

David Fasold, in his book `The Discovery of Noah's Ark' on pages 137, and 267 (**4), bring the following facts to bear. He has since retracted these ideas but nevertheless they are still revenant. In reference to the outer covering of pitch, he proposed it as the Akkadians `KPR'.

​

`A bituminous mixture of feldspar and pumice that through a chemical reaction formed a zeolite that set up a mixture similar to Portland cement'. But with a higher ratio of pitch it would not have been as brittle as cement.

​

Zeolite is a `secondary mineral occurring in cavities and veins in eruptive rocks, usually a hydrous silicate of aluminium and sodium ...'

​

He speaks of a mixture of bitumen, pumice and feldspar, the same which was used in the Tower of Babel for mortar. The pumice here is used for lightness, as in Iceland where they make a cement out of pumice instead of sand, and this form of cement actually floats. An ingeneous idea! Last century, a waterproofing cement for cork was made out a mixture of pitch or bitumen, stone dust, and rosin, a form of resin from trees. Either would have done.

​

Gen.11:3. And they said to one another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them
thoroughly. And they made brick for stone, and slime (Margin; bitumen)
had they for mortar.

​

This KPR sets quite hard as does cement, and yet with a higher ratio of bitumen, it would endure some `give', so necessary in a ship construction that undulates. This was the thick `Covering' over the reeds indeed making this 500ft. vessel a little rigid, and yet with enough `give' to undulate. Modern large tankers of 900 ft.are especially built to cope with this problem, and actually undulate as they pass through ocean swells.

​

Naturally, for every person who would agree to this ship?s construction as above, there will be multitudes more to discredit same. The expert critics we always have with us, for wouldn?t Noah have had his share while the Ark was being built. That won't work, they would have declared! How could this thing possibly float? Or, It will break up in five minutes flat! Its a vessel of doom, and will be your coffin! Impossible, they affirm! Anyhow, they must have reasoned, as it was miles from any sea, where is the water for it to float? And the result? `And all flesh drowned that moved upon the earth' that was not within the Ark! So much for `expert' criticism.

​

The Covering.
The spiritual aspect.

​

This `Covering' of bituminous cement made with pumice, applied for waterproofing the buoyant hollow reeds and giving some rigidity, made the vessel very light for its size to lift over mountainous seas, remembering that the vessel was afloat for 5 months. But this `Covering' has a very spiritual connotation. In the exact same way that there is absolutely no deliverance from the condemnation soon to come upon this present world, without the covering of Christ's precious Robe of Righteousness. So in the exact the same way, the Ark could not deliver Noah and his family from the falling condemnation, without its saving `Covering' of strength which also allowed some movement. This strong cement like pitch was indeed that `Covering', and it is this exact point which unconsciously draws so much criticism.

​

Heb.11:7. By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with
fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by which he condemned
the world, and became heir of righteousness which is by faith.

​

2Pet.2:5. And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher
of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly.

​

Indeed, Noah was a preacher of righteousness, by being an heir of Righteousness by Faith, because his full trust and confidence was completely in God. He trusted in God for the saving of himself and his family, and was given clear instructions on how to prepare the strong `Covering' that was to be the means of withstanding all the horrific onslaughts that this world could throw at him, and eventually bring salvation to his ship and family, which in fact brought them from one era to the next. And what was his immediate action when he disembarked from the Ark on to dry land? He sacrificed by blood, the true ?Covering? of the Righteousness of Christ.

​

`There is nothing new under the sun'!

​

More to the point for humanity, Righteousness by Faith Alone is as a Robe of ?Covering? and is the very basis of ALL deliverance!

​

SHIP DESIGN.

​

The Ark was an absolute master-piece of design. David Fasold believed that he had found the Ark of Noah on one of the mountains near Ararat, and in this he was correct, even though he might now retract his conclusions! Under pressure from the ?experts? he retracted these beliefs, but that does not make them void, for who would want to go to sea in a floating barge type warehouse designed by a Church committee, that would break up in five minutes?. As for the type of craft and its construction, he was right on its location. The outline of the Ark that he pictured and described, is still there. This imprint of Noah's Ark is found at the 6,240 ft. mark upon Mt. Mahser Dagi (The Doomsday Mountain), some seventeen miles to the south of Mt Ararat. Every last remnant of the Gopher wood construction of this great ship has long disappeared, most of it eaten by the hungry animals while waiting for grasses to grow, but its imprint, providentially preserved, remains clear to this day, and the only tangible remnant of its existence would be the traces of the KPR. left in the surrounding soil. It was originally found after an earthquake on Nov.13, 1948, by a Turkish farmer named Reshit.

​

Close observance on this imprint shows the outlines of the great 500ft. ship, Noah's Ark, to be quite fascinating, because it is the same shape as a modern yacht into which thousands of man hours and computer technology have been expended to find the ultimate design. Basically the ancient Ark of Noah corresponds to that same design. In the modern racing yacht the long slender bows are designed to slice through waves for minimum resistance. But here is the twist. The Ark was NOT designed to slice through the waves for speed. The Ark was a ship that was going no-where. It was not designed for speed but rather the opposite, for it was designed for survival, to go as SLOW as possible. Meaning this, that the long slender bow was not the bow at all, but rather the stern. As we have previously seen in the Egyptian copies, the in-curved stern was copied to allow the overtaking waves as little resistance as possible. But what is the point of this? All vessels are made to go from point A, to point B, and the aim with all boats and ships is to get to the destination as quickly and with less effort as possible. So then it is the bow of a ship or boat that is flared to lift over the oncoming wave action and offer as least resistance as possible.

​

Below is a not to scale hull outline of the Ark, as found on a mountain near Mt. Ararat.

​

It appears to be back to front, because the swells were deflected by the sharp stern.
The sharp stern was held into the swells by drogue stones.
Note the reverse yacht-like shape,

​

Construction; bundled reeds overlaid with KPR.

​

?[1] Flared stern to counter following waves.

​

Hull pool to drain off animal wastes, and motion of the ship caused an air pump effect for ventilation. The hull pool also slowed the ship down tremendously.

​

Hogging and stress lines to support the ship.

​

Original idea for a hull-pool, David Fassold.

​

Note; There is no evidence of the hull pool left.

​

This hull design is very similar not only to modern yachts, but also of many water line shapes of the fast ships of today which are built for speed. But to repeat, the Ark was a vessel going no-where, so speed was not a requirement. So then if the ?blunt end? were made the bow, and the ?sharp end? were made the stern, then wave resistance becomes minimal in pushing the ship forward. This will make the ship go slower. Drogue stones were hung from the stern also to slow the vessel down and to keep the vessel?s stern to the oncoming seas.

​

This boat was designed by God and not the timber monstrosity designed by a committee of churchmen.
This was a reed boat, over-coated with pitch..

​

Again Fasold stumbled on a surprising fact. As a master Mariner with experience in salvaging, he believed there was a hull-pool within the Ark. The truth was that such an arrangement of a reinforced hull pool was actually there in the Ark, and for the very reasons that he shows. But all have long since disappeared, and today no evidence of this hull-pool exists. But what is a hull-pool, and what are the benefits?

​

A hull pool is a large enclosed rectangular hole right through the bottom of the hull like a swimming pool without a bottom, and allows access to the sea. Modern dredges and oil-drilling rigs have this arrangement so that work can be carried out through this hull-pool while the centre of gravity remains on the centre line of the ship at all times during operations, thus keeping the ship or rig stable during maximum lift. But this hull-pool creates such an enormous drag when moving, that modern ships have to have hydraulic closing doors, as it is the only way in which the ship may attain normal speed. But not so with the Ark, as it was advantageous to have as much drag as possible to slow the vessel down, and this arrangement did. Fasold from his own experience has this to say concerning Hull-pools.

​

`The water that extended up through the hull of the raft stabilized it. Since water cannot be sheared below the hull pool due to adhesion, any forceful action by a wave against the hull in any direction would cause an opposite reaction through turbulence created in the pool. It is then doubtful that any abrupt change in direction or momentum would occur in the Ark if it crested a wave, being taunt on her sea anchor lines, or in the fetch (when the drogue lines might slack) because of the pool.'

​

`The Discovery of Noah's Ark' 1990, Pg.141.

​

The conclusions therefore are that the vessel with a hull-pool and drogue stones, which will be discussed later, would keep it from broaching, and coming beam on to the sea! Possibly the worst scenario that can befall any ship or boat in a wild sea is broaching, or to come broadside to oncoming wild seas, for then the possibility of a capsize or roll-over is very real.

​

And again on page 142.

​

`The main advantage I could see at this time was that it would relieve hogging stress loads on this portion of the hull due to its extreme beam width. It could keep the advantage of width for stability and not suffer the stress caused by buoyancy with the hull open to the sea.'

​

The `Hogging Line' on a reed boat was a horizontal line or brace from stem to stern, with vertical lines down to brace various points of the hull. This would be similar to the stress loads reduced by the superstructure of a suspension bridge. Hogging was the plague of large timber ships last century but were not usually found in iron or steel ships as they do not `give' as does timber. Not having hogging lines was the very reason that Thor Heyerdahl's first reed boat failed to make its destination, because he had taken off these hogging stress line from the stern of his boat during construction, and after a period at sea without its necessary support, the aft section collapsed. So really the Ark was a survival vessel of the first order.

​

Heyerdahl found that the high upturned reed towers broke the force of oncoming waves and gave reserve buoyancy when the bow or stern buried, and in-curved stern helped with lift as the wave passed. This offered as least resistance as possible, thus helped to keep the speed down.

​

This hull-pool had other enormous advantages. As the `three stories' were built above this hull-pool, the `mucking out' was accomplished by sluicing out with water as is done on modern animal transport ships of today. With the Ark, rain and sea spray from the mountainous waves were channelled into the pens via conduits, and this practically eliminated any of the repetitive work. The waste and slops were washed into the hull-pool by opening these channels, which then was quickly washed away by the sea action. It was not washed over the sides or into tanks and pumped out as with modern ships, as the Ark was an enclosed vessel without pumps. And most important, with this design the Ark simply didn't have bilges for wastes to accumulate, and necessitate voluminous amounts of labour. The elements did this work for them.

​

Which brings us to next potential problem, for that problem was the volatile methane gas. As the movement of the hull of the Ark over the waves continually caused the water level in the hull-pool to lower and then to rise, and as explained in the book, becomes a giant `piston' arrangement, pumping air continually throughout the whole ship, and wouldn?t such a cargo necessitate it? Therefore the accumulation of any volitile methane gas was impossible as it was continually pumped out and eliminated, as are modern animal transport ships of today. Also with this system, all animal smells were effectively eliminated along with the methane gas. This truly was a Divine design.

​

The larger animals were stalled on the main deck about the hull-pool. The smaller animals and birds etc. and animal fodder was on the second story, with more animal fodder and Noah and his family's quarters on the top deck. The side door was positioned so that when closed it became part of the wall of the superstructure. It was an angel sent by God who closed this massive door when all were aboard, a week before the rains came. In fact it was the true angel of the Covenant, Jesus Christ the Righteous as we know Him, that closed that massive door exactly as it will be by His very Word that declares at the last time, ?There shall be time no longer?, as the door of our probation swings shut. But back to the Ark, and as before explained, all corner posts bearing the deck house were set upon large flat stones settled into the reed bed o bear the weight of the structure, placed in the same way in which the Egyptians set their A-frame masts in their reed boats. And there remains one other important feature of this magnificent vessel not yet accounted for. The drogue stones.

​

THE DROGUE STONES.

​

The remains of the reeds quickly disintergrated in very short order, but not so the drogue stones. These have since been found, but severely marked with graffiti. It is absolutely amazing how some who profess to know God argue about these mystical inscriptions on these drogue stones that were found near the outline of the Ark, and thus try to come up with a date derived from these inscriptions. But before we go into that, let us consider the stones themselves.

​

Fasold states that there have been ten found already. They average 10ft. in height, 5ft. in width, and approx. 10 ins. in thickness. They were thickest at the top through which a 3in. to 4in. hole was drilled to take a drogue line. This hole was tapered out to approx. 7ins. on both sides to eliminate the sharp stone edge which would very soon cut the line. These stones weigh approx. 4 tons out of the water.

​

Smaller stones, 7ft. in length, by 2ft.3ins. width, and approx 10ins. thick at the top, all drilled with 3ins. holes, were also found.

​

The purpose of these trailing stones were multiple. The first was to create as much drag as possible. Immersed in sea water it was not the weight of these stones that was important, but it was the surface area that produced the needed drag, as do modern sea-anchors. The weight of the stones helped to eliminate slackness in the line, because after cresting a wave, if the drogue stones were not heavy enough, they would cause the lines to jerk, and through repeated jerking would eventually break and the stones would be lost. Secondly, these drogue stones were all placed at intervals trailing from the stern. This would hold the stern firmly centre to overtaking waves and driving winds, thus eliminating the probability of broaching and capsizing. For this is the whole point, because the Ark was Divinely and primarily designed to take all seas on its stern, its stern had to be set this way, and that was accomplished by these drogue stones. There is a most intriguing Scripture found in Genesis as follows.

​

Gen.7:19. And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills
that were under the whole heaven, were covered.
V.20. Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were
covered.

​

Now if the waters covered the highest mountain by fifteen royal cubits, or 26ft. approx., then how would Noah know that? He most certainly didn't have a modern depth sounder, then how? Simple. The lowest drogue stone would be a sacrificial light one, hanging the lowest. If it struck bottom which would have been the top of a submerged mountain peak, possibly the stone would have been lost, but then knowledge of the depth of the shallow water would be known. Noah knew the maximum depth of each stone through the lengths of the drogue lines.

​

Then we come to the inscriptions upon these drogue stones. How odd that they who profess to know God quibble about such insignificant absurdities. Usually a man believes that which he wants to believe and to him his own opinion is of the utmost importance. It has to be defended at any cost for his reputation is at stake, and to him the need for his reputation to be unsullied is paramount. Truth is detailed well into second place, for an unsullied reputation is the name of the game. Well to they who quibble on this point, answer this question.

​

Where are the steles of Job, or Abraham, or Moses, or any of the true men of God?

​

They are non-existent, because that was simply NOT their way to scribble self aggrandizements into rock, nor is it God's way. In short these drogue stones were simply just that, drogue stones. If Noah had written anything at all upon them it would have been only to number them, and that in a numerology that we would not understand. Noah, nor any other man of God does not go about scribbling pagan mystical signs into rocks for posterity!

​

But then we come to another type of people who do. These stones were inscribed in later times by people who didn't know God, or rather thought that they knew God but by their actions showed that they really didn't. Even today people in false religious fervour, deify religious objects, any object which some righteous person may have used or to have come in contact. The Roman Catholic Church is full of it. And as for some similar stones being found in other countries, even today counterfeits of important religious objects are covertly manufactured in competition for ownership prestige. Such drogue stones would be magnificent prestige items for rival Churches or groups to `keep up with the Jones'. For sure, Noah's drogue stones were originally unmarked!

​

So we conclude that as the `ark rested ... upon the mountains of Ararat', a trail of drogue stones were cut off as they grounded at different depths as they would have become as anchors. This allowed the Ark to come finally to rest, at the 6,240 ft. mark on Mt. Masher Dagi, the Doomsday mountain, one of the mountains of Ararat, and seventeen miles from Mt. Ararat itself. Its impression, and impression only has been Divinely preserved for all to see to this day.

​

CONCLUSIONS.

​

Noah's ark was a large ship, 515ft. long, 87ft. beam, and 77ft. high, built of gopher wood. This gopher wood was a buoyant river reed, thus making the Ark a reed boat with upturned ends. The Ark had a towering bow and stern for strength, and to break the force of large oncoming waves. Hogging line supports went from end to end with periodic lines supporting the hull as used in suspension bridges. It was an elongated sickle shaped ship similar in some ways to Pharaoh Cheops timber solar boat. The basic shape was similar to the large modern racing yachts, and water line shapes of today?s fast ships. In a sea-way, the towering stern broke the power of the overtaking giant white-caps and steep waves, and gave reserve buoyancy if the stern buried in a wave. The concave shaped lines of the stern allowed smaller passing waves minimum resistance and also gave lift. The whole vessel was `Covered' with a KPR mixture of rosin or feldspar, pumice, and bitumen, which sets hard. But it contained a high ratio of bitumen which allowed `give', so necessary for movement when the vessel undulated from wave action. The pumice gave the , KPR lightness with strength. This process gave rigidity and strength, something like steel, to this large ship for it to endure punishing gales and mountainous waves of the time. It also gave waterproofing to prevent water absorption in the reeds, and protection from the elements to all aboard .

​

There was a hull-pool in the centre of the ship producing maximum drag, and for the ease of cleaning out animal wastes, and an efficient pump system for recycling fresh air and elimination of accumulation of the dangerous inflammable methane gas. This vessel didn't have bilges for the wastes to accumulate and produce highly inflammable methane gas. To sum up; This ship was indeed a miracle of survival which did everything it was designed to do. And what was the very first thing that Noah did after he had grounded and released the animals? He gave offerings of thanks to his God of Deliverance!

​

R.P. Tickle
PO. Box 381
Mooloolaba Q. 4557.
Australia.

​

BIBLIOGRAPHY.
(**2).
`The Tigris Expeditions',
Thor Heyerdahl, 1980.
Geo. Allen & Unwin London.
Pgs.315-6, of the same book. Page 13.

​

(**4).
`The Discovery of Noah's Ark'
D. Fasold Page 21.

​

(**5).
`The Ra Expeditions'
Thor Heyerdahl,
(Allen and Unwin, London) Page 24.

​

taken from: http://www.lookandlive.com/...ging&hl=en

---