Noah's Ark in Kentucky

[Vex]

According to Conservapedia:

So there ya have it! Apparently some kinda proto-kangaroos lived in Israel. Or something.

I must admit that "Kangaroo" is the first item I looked up when I heard of Conservapedia. You should look that up in one window, open up "Kangaroo" in Wikipedia next to it, and make your own conclusions... :whistle: Better yet, then look up "baramin" on Wikipedia for extra reading. Pretty much says it all, and it's not kind...

Next time I see a Kangaroo in the park across the street, I will yell "GO HOME TO THE MIDDLE EAST, YOU BARAMINIAN BASTARD!"

Seriously, though, I face-palmed reading this. These idiots admit to believing in some kind of evolution, only their version makes even less sense than creationism in the first place.

And in reply to the question someone asked about there being archaeological evidence of a flood:

I'm not entirely sure because I couldn't find the textbook I wanted, but I believe that the 'evidence' is basically old observations of inland seas. Before the time of modern archaeology, people would find the fossils of sea-dwelling species inland and they thought it was proof of the Great Flood. There might actually be modern evidence of it, but it's not something I've covered in my archaeology classes.

[Deleted12]

Noah's ark is coming to Kentucky.

Answers in Genesis, the Christian ministry behind the Creation Museum, plans to build a life-size replica of the biblical ark by 2014. If the plan comes to fruition, the ark will be part of a new theme park called Ark Encounter that, like the Creation Museum, aims to mix a literal take on the Bible with family fun.

The Creation Museum, also in Kentucky, is described on its comprehensive website as a "state-of-the-art 70,000-square-foot museum [that] brings the pages of the Bible to life." Exhibits include Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden; children playing near dinosaurs; and a movie called "Men in White" that explores how the Bible and science match up.

Under the Ark Encounter portion of the website, Ken Ham, the president, chief executive and founder of Answers in Genesis-U.S. and the Creation Museum, explains why the group wants to build it. In part, he says, it's to demonstrate how Noah could have built the ark. The effort also will teach visitors about "the geological aspects of the flood" and help them gain an understanding of "God's grace and mercy," he says.

Answers in Genesis has determined that the biblical wooden ship was 500 feet long and about 80 feet high, and plans to have a team of Amish builders construct the new version entirely of wood.

The Creation Museum is accepting donations to help make its ark a reality. The fundraising goal is $24.5 million, according to its website, and so far nearly $3.7 million has been raised.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nationn ... nesis.html

[tehgoobster]

I've read that it's for-profit, too. :roll:

[emmiedahl]

Maybe in domestic animals, but there is serious diversity in the wild. And a dog is really a dog from an evolutionary perspective; a doxie is not a separate species rom a Rottweiler, just a different phenotype. It's still a dog as in Canis lupus familiaris.

That ark would not be big enough to hold all the types of wild cat, for example, and they did not have time to evolve unless that story is a lot older than I think it is.

edit: brain dead as usual

[gardenvarietycitizen]

Anyway, I'd like a solid definition of "kinds" from any Noah's Ark believers we've got available. Anyone? :whistle:

Not a believer here, but I'll point you toward the idea of a "baramin" - you can start by reading about Baraminology on Wikipedia.

Alas, it's not a completely settled or solid definition, but the article explains the issue - basically, it's about reading through scriptures to list up all the "kinds" that God is mentioned as creating, and then trying to shoehorn that to fit with some "modern common sense" ideas of what people just know from daily life exist as species (so, kangaroos - we've all seen 'em on TV at least). If you look around the word "baramin" you can probably find some arguments over it.

I've found that the talk.origins archive (a website devoted to the creation/evolution debate, spawned from the talk.origins group on USENET) is a good resource for decoding a lot of talk, also - you can find out the "okay, what is this" in one place without having to wade through lots of sermons. The site is very "just the facts ma'am" but the facts... aren't so kind to creationism... :whistle:

Kinda fascinating stuff though, to see the gymnastics involved.

Related to the topic of the thread, if you visit the Creation Museum (or just find photos on the internet!) you can see that they have wall displays showing how one ark representative (so say, a horse-like thing, surely a proto-ass) then supposedly LATER develops into all the varieties of species we have now, so horses, asses, zebras, whatever. It never mentions the "e-word" of course. So they're defnitely into this "kinds" "baramin" stuff.

The weird thing to me about Creation Science in particular is how much they desperately want it to be scientific, so they go to all these lengths. Whereas, if God Did It, surely God can make the Ark into a giant Boat of Holding akin to Mary Poppins' bag and have it magically float upon the waves, no?

[slickcat79]

The weird thing to me about Creation Science in particular is how much they desperately want it to be scientific, so they go to all these lengths. Whereas, if God Did It, surely God can make the Ark into a giant Boat of Holding akin to Mary Poppins' bag and have it magically float upon the waves, no?

This. I've seen a hilarious video describing the buildup to the flood here:

It basically comes down to...if god had to work THAT much "magic" to make the Noah story possible, why even bother with a flood to destroy the world in the first place? Sure god could have just blinked or twitched his nose and killed all the evil people, right?

And in reply to the question someone asked about there being archaeological evidence of a flood:

I'm not entirely sure because I couldn't find the textbook I wanted, but I believe that the 'evidence' is basically old observations of inland seas. Before the time of modern archaeology, people would find the fossils of sea-dwelling species inland and they thought it was proof of the Great Flood. There might actually be modern evidence of it, but it's not something I've covered in my archaeology classes.

You don't need no stinkin' textbooks! You just need to read the essay winners from this year's VF creative writing contest and they will tell you everything you need to know:

visionforum.com/news/essaycontests/cover2011/default.aspx

I actually wouldn't be surprised if an unusual warming event or some seismic activity did cause unexpected flooding in localized areas. With no concept of the size of the world and no easy way of traveling long distances, it wouldn't actually take that much flooding to convince a bronze-age society that god is destroying the world.

[dawn9476]

I don't care that they are building this. Whatever. What makes me upset about it is that the state of Kentucky is giving them a $43 million dollar tax break for it while at the same time they are cutting social services. They are also getting a 75 percent tax break for 30 years,

[GeoBQn]

Are those ark dimensions the ones that are accepted by biblical scholars? Will the Ark theme park include a biblically accurate vineyard next to it? Don't the Amish tend to shy away from this stuff?

[doggie]

pee would be far worse then poop. poop can be scooped pee would leak through the floors and rain down.

[clibbyjo]

I want an Israeli Koala and an Israeli Lemur...and a Panda. I have never been to Israel, so could someone post a pic of the original ones from Israel for me?

[ElphabaGalinda]

I've been to Israel, and I haven't seen an Israeli Koala or Lemur. Maybe I was going to the wrong places:D Though I was in Israel for a month, and it didn't rain at all, so i can imagine it wouldn't take much for it to feel like a flood.

[snarkykitty]

Is it me, or does anyone else find the title confusing?

[ElphabaGalinda]

Is it me, or does anyone else find the title confusing?

It's not just you, I don't get it at all. I only looked at the thread because i look at all of them.

[bicyclecat]

I actually wouldn't be surprised if an unusual warming event or some seismic activity did cause unexpected flooding in localized areas. With no concept of the size of the world and no easy way of traveling long distances, it wouldn't actually take that much flooding to convince a bronze-age society that god is destroying the world.

This. I do practice what I cann rational Christianity and believe in the Bible, I understand that it was written by men who were likley very superstitious and had little grasp of scientific principles that we understand today. The entire world flooding could have been a hurricane or another natural phenomena, that was interpreted as being a punishment from God, because nobody actually understood what it was. I also believe that "the whole world" was really only the world that they knew about and that the local flooding didn't effect the rest of the planet that they didn't know about.

While I believe that a flood happened and that Noah probably did build an ark with a bunch of animals on it, I don't believe that the entire planet flooded and that every animal and plant species that we have today was contained on that ark. I think that most of the seemingly ridiculous stories in the Bible have a basis of truth to them, but they have to be read with the understanding that they were written by very unsophistocated and superstitious people.

[Joykins]

What about all the bugs and stuff?I know if I'd been on that ark, I would have probably stepped on an ant or swatted a mosquito or something. One misstep and an entire species is wiped out!

Just think--2 of every species. Think of the mass prey extinctions that happened once the predators got loosed again. All a predator need sto do is EAT JUST ONE and the whole species is gone.

[Joykins]

I guess I am missing soemthing. I just don't get what it proves. Like, yeah, you can build a boat--one that never has to float on water at that. Is it proof that people can build boats? Most of us already believe that.

I was under the impression that there is some archaeological proof of a large flood at some point.

The Black Sea flood -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_theory