rlogan

I'm sure this has been investigated by those actually trained for these things. But I was curious about the size of the Ark and how much food it could hold. So, here we go. (Note: I've rounded quite a bit in the discussion here while my spread sheet is computing at two decimal places.)

The most generous quote for a cubit that I found was 21.888 inches. So 300X50X30 cubits ends up at 2.73 million cubic feet of volume for outside dimensions. Assuming 75% volume for inside dimensions and structural members/floors, etc. yields 2.05 million cubic feet.

The animals were in the Ark for a year. So I looked up some specs on animal feed requirements. (Penned animals.)

Elephants weighing 6 tons each will consume 109.5 tons of food in that time, and at 310 cubic feet storage per ton that's 33,945 cubic feet of space for the elephant food. Horses will need about 3,258 cubic feet of food storage space, while rabbits will need about 94. Clearly, it isn't worth doing animal by animal. So I propose we average the horses and rabbits just for illustration. It's about 1,676 cubic feet of storage per pair of animals.

Admitedly this is a SWAG approach, but bear with me for fun. With 2.05 million cubic feet of space available and 1,676 cubic feet of food storage space per animal pair we arrive at food storage space for 1,221 pairs of animals. Well, we should be somewhat "realistic" and say 80% volumetric packing efficiency. That brings us to food storage for 977 pairs of animals.

Now, forgive me in that I have absolutely no qualifications to do this. But my SWAG analysis says if the Ark was used for nothing but food, we'd have enough food space for something like a thousand pairs of animals.

So, it's a good thing animals can swim.

Magus55

You are assuming all animals were full grown, actually ate that much, and none of them went into a form of hibernation.

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c013.html

rlogan

Thanks Magus.

Hibernating horses. That's a good play.

In part, that's why I took a "fudge factor" of tenfold more animals than my calculations implied. So if they're small and hibernating is a factor of ten sufficient?

I see the website you cited only gives 18 inches per cubit. That works out to food space for 543 pairs of animals.

Multiplying that by ten for a fudge factor results in an Ark that holds food for 5,430 pairs of animals.

- But no animals.

Biff the unclean

You are also assuming that you can build a barge of those dimensions out of gopher wood. Without steel ribs and steel bracing the ark would have fallen apart of it's own weight.

Of course God probably made the critters tiny ittsy bittsy. Like those compressed sponge dinosaurs you can get in toy stores. Noah took them all aboard in his pockets. When the rain stopped he tossed them over the side and they absorbed all the water from the flood and popped into fully grown animals. That explains why there isn't enough water on the planet to have caused a world wide flood with and why animals are still to this very day made mostly of water.

rlogan

OK, Biff - you've given me some items to quantify.

I'm working on the sponge coefficient, but it's going to take some time. I did find a useful professional ship engineering site at:

http://www.genesisfiles.com/NoahsArk.htm

They've shown Moses had some more detailed structural data, and:

"the information could have come from "The Book of Noah", a more detailed version of the Genesis account and also a much sought after book that has never been discovered."

Not knowing much about animal ventilation requirements in shipping I appreciated them pointing out that:

"With its cargo of animals, it would have been necessary to have more than one eighteen inch window for ventilation"

Yes, probably two windows. Just riveting stuff.

The bad news is the site indicates the hebrwe cubit is 17.5 inches. So now we're down to enough food space for 500 pairs of animals. Multiplying by ten for hibernation, itty bitty-ness and such results in food storage space for 5000 pairs od animals.

- but again, no space for the animals themselves.

Lastly, I followed your suggestion on structural integrity. I see from the history of shipbuilding that iron was not used in ships until the 19th century. Holy cow - how could they overlook such an important exception as the ark?

Dean Anderson

You ought to get a job with AnswersInGenesis. This is so much more plausible than that dumb 'Vapour Canopy' hypothesis...

Beetle

The figures given in the Bible for the ark are merely for the exterior dimensions. It was actually larger inside than outside. You know, like a TARDIS. (don't check it, just print it)

rlogan

Actually, Beetle - You've struck upon an important issue.

The Ark must be like a pop-up camper.

So yes, much larger dimensions on the "inside".

MadMez

I keep horses here in Bend, Oregon. As it's the high desert and my property has no pasture for them to graze, I feed them year round and thus am able to guesstimate a little as to the equine needs of Noah's horsies. Just for grins.

Your typical pair of horses will (just about, asuming you want them alive when you hit Ararat) get through on half a ton of hay a month, which is 11 bales. Half a ton of two string bales takes up (I went and measured it) 520 cubic feet. This stuff is well packed and baled, loose hay takes up a third more room than this. I checked. So were talking 9000 cu ft for the feed for the year. The horse will need a 1400 cu ft stall each. But....

Confinement is something else altogether. Horses and other livestock do not like long periods "cooped up" and will kill to get out of one after a short while. Or just die. For example the British Army resupply fleet sailing for Boston in 1775 loaded 4,000 sheep and 856 horses. In recognition of the perils of shipping livestock, a premium of two shillings and sixpence was promised to the masters of the transports for each animal delivered alive. And these captains knew their business.

148 sheep and 532 horses made it.

And Magus, me old mate..

"You are assuming all animals were full grown, actually ate that much, and none of them went into a form of hibernation."

A yearling will each pretty much the same as an 8 year old. And yes, I do know what my animals eat. I am off, however, to the vet, and will ask about this hibernation thing. You could save me tons of feed!

I can only think that the writer(s) of this myth were entirely ignorant of the joys of animal transport, else they'd have picked a more believable story. How 'bout creating a tall tower to put them all in then knocking it into a rubble feature appologists / priests can point to, once the water receeds? Nah, guess not. How bout a cave? Nah. Ah, screw it, use an ark, it'll take 'em a while to figure that out.

Magus55

This is a supernatural event by definition. No amount of deciding how much food animals eat now under entirely different conditions means anything. God could put the animals in a state of hibernation whenever he wanted too, whether it was natural or not. No one is arguing that the flood could happen without God.

Sometimes i think too much reasoning can be unhealthy.... :banghead: