Scientists at the University of Leicester have discovered that Noah's Ark could have carried 70,000 animals without sinking if built from the dimensions listed in The Bible.

Noah’s Ark would have floated even with two of every animal in the world packed inside, scientists have calculated.
Although researchers are unsure if all the creatures could have squeezed into the huge boat, they are confident it would have handled the weight of 70,000 creatures without sinking.
A group of master’s students from the Department of Physics and Astronomy at Leicester University studied the exact dimensions of the Ark, set out in Genesis 6:13-22.

[cont.]
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/scie ... imals.html

Someone remind me just how many species of animals there are on the planet.

I'm pretty sure that it was a much bigger number than 35,000 when I last looked.

Matt_B wrote:Someone remind me just how many species of animals there are on the planet.

I'm pretty sure that it was a much bigger number than 35,000 when I last looked.

I understand there are an estimated 350,000 species just of beetles. Estimates of the global species count is somewhere around 8.7million of which 7.7 million are animals.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14616161.

Of course the physics department at Leicester University probably isn't too strong on animal husbandry. You might be able to pack 70,000 animals into a God-barge that size. They'd start to die pretty quickly though.

70,000 of which creatures. There's a big difference between 70,000 insects and 70,000 large mammals. And just to ruin it slightly more, I once worked in a zoo. The amount of food required per day is ridiculous. So how long did they need (fresh) food supplies for again?

I'm With Stupid wrote:70,000 of which creatures. There's a big difference between 70,000 insects and 70,000 large mammals. And just to ruin it slightly more, I once worked in a zoo. The amount of food required per day is ridiculous. So how long did they need (fresh) food supplies for again?

Well the article just says you can squeeze them on and it will float. I don't think they are trying to support the myth, hence the lack detail on how to maintain them.
I was wondering about the sizes of the animals myself. Maybe they were going for average sized mammals or something.

I thought there were 2 of each unclean animal but 7 of each clean animal?

I'd just like to point out that a lot of the animals were to be brought on in groups of 7, not 2.

Oops, too late.

The article suggests a volume of their calculated size would float with their calculated weight on board.

That's all I can read into it.

It's a very long way from there to fitting the volume of their selected animals inside such a space and a longer way to demonstrating such a structure would have the structural integrity to stay together. Not to mention several other factors like air to breathe, managing not to crush all but the top layers, food and waste management.

Maybe there was more to their task than reported, I'm trying to work out why high school students couldn't perform the same simple buoyancy calculation.

Previous research has suggested that there were approximately 35,000 species of animals which would have needed to be saved by Noah

Research? Suggested?

Suggested by who, Ken Ham?

trubble76 wrote:I thought there were 2 of each unclean animal but 7 of each clean animal?

According to my clock I thought of that first.

I'm With Stupid wrote:I'd just like to point out that a lot of the animals were to be brought on in groups of 7, not 2.

Oops, too late.

And that.

When if ever will the forum show the correct time on posts?

catbasket wrote:

trubble76 wrote:I thought there were 2 of each unclean animal but 7 of each clean animal?

According to my clock I thought of that first.

I'm With Stupid wrote:I'd just like to point out that a lot of the animals were to be brought on in groups of 7, not 2.

Oops, too late.

And that.

When if ever will the forum show the correct time on posts?

I have always been considered slow by my peers. Consider my post an echo or something.

Animavore wrote:

I'm With Stupid wrote:70,000 of which creatures. There's a big difference between 70,000 insects and 70,000 large mammals. And just to ruin it slightly more, I once worked in a zoo. The amount of food required per day is ridiculous. So how long did they need (fresh) food supplies for again?

Well the article just says you can squeeze them on and it will float. I don't think they are trying to support the myth, hence the lack detail on how to maintain them.
I was wondering about the sizes of the animals myself. Maybe they were going for average sized mammals or something.

Given that they're physicists, I suspect that they're probably assuming spherical mammals.

Some tit wrote:

Scientists...

A group of master’s students...

Journalism fail.

You see it would have been a tragedy if actual scientists had spent actual paid hours on this utter guff.

Fortunately it looks like it was just students having a bit of fun.

But hey, let nothing get in the way of a good headline.

Published 5 papers from my masters. Who was to know I was just having a bit of fun?

I.E. there is nothing to stop Masters students doing actual science, particularly if they are doing a masters by thesis and not a masters by course-work.

Mind you, I agree with you that it appears no novel science was in danger of being done during this event.

Matt_B wrote:Someone remind me just how many species of animals there are on the planet.

I'm pretty sure that it was a much bigger number than 35,000 when I last looked.

Because baranome magic and created kinds, that's why. Don't question God again.

And are 'they' going to re-evaluate this important 'research' using the latest Babylonian tablet info?

Babylonian Noah's Ark

As a long time power and sail boater, I can assure you there is one great big fuck off difference between "float" and "survive for months in the biggest goddamned storm in the planet's history without either power or sails". A canoe floats nicely, but it wouldn't be my choice of vessels in which to ride out a Cat 5 hurricane.

A couple of observations ...

[1] How did Mr 600 Year Old Barge Captain know the difference between co-called "clean" and "unclean" animals, 1,700 years before the requisite statements on this subject first appeared in Leviticus?

[2] The count for beetles has recently been cited as 400,000 species known to science. The "big five" taxonomic Orders of insects alone account for a million species between them.

[3] Given that assorted creationists think that dinosaurs were on their favourite fantasy floating petting zoo, did any of the people involved in this project factor in the need to accommodate ninety Genera of Sauropods ... note, that's Genera, not species. Count the species, and the total for Sauropods alone comes to something like 250. The smallest of these was 30 feet long and 15 tons, whilst the largest (if one takes Argentinosaurus as the benchmark, the species for which rigorous data exists in this respect) was possibly as long as 130 feet, and possibly 100 tons in weight. Someone tell me how the hell you put even one of these animals on a boat, let alone 500 of them.

Alan B wrote:And are 'they' going to re-evaluate this important 'research' using the latest Babylonian tablet info?

Babylonian Noah's Ark

Actually, a circular craft would be more seaworthy than the traditional version. Can't broach a circular craft, and a hull of reinforced, waterproofed woven rope is less likely to break up than a rigid wooden vessel.