Ken Ham is still babbling about the giant fake boat he’s building with taxpayer support in Kentucky.
The creationist said the ark — which will be the largest timber structure in the world when it’s completed — is a
jaw-dropping experiencefor visitors who have been able to see it already.
These guests often stop in their tracks. They contemplate the massive beams and the craftsmanship,Ham said.They talk to me about the obvious complexity in the Ark’s engineering and architecture. In doing so, they begin to think about Noah in a correct way. You see, many people have (even unwittingly) adopted an evolutionary view of history, thinking that ancient people were less intelligent and less advanced than we are today. They wondered how Noah could have built such an impressive ship.
Wait.
Do these visitors even realize that what they’re looking at is a modern construction? That Ken Ham had contractors build it from plans created by modern architects and engineers? That it is not a 4000 year old boat transported to the New World from a hilltop in Turkey?
This is like if I were to pull out my iPhone and wave it around and declare that Noah had a phone just like this, and then all the gullible spectators ooohed and aaahed over it and marveled at Noah’s technological expertise. They would wonder how Noah could have built such an impressive cell phone.
He didn’t, you dolt. Apple did.
I also wonder about this so-called evolutionary view of history,
in which people from 4000 years ago are considered less intelligent
than we are today. No one I know thinks there were significant biological differences in intelligence between then and now. I do think ancient peoples were technologically less advanced than we are today, but it isn’t evolution that says that, it is the historical evidence. Unless now Answers in Genesis is planning to endorse Ancient Astronauts nonsense?
Ham also made a surprising announcement: they’re going to change our views on Noah, who was not an old, white-haired, frail man.
I have two shockers for Ken Ham.
-
Esteemed creationist sources have declared that Noah was 600 years old at the time of the flood. That’s old. No way around it.
-
That is not a photograph of Noah. It is a photograph of a bust cobbled up by artists working for Ken Ham. He could make it look like anything he wanted, so there is no credible authority behind his rendering.
I could unveil this bust and declare it to be a surprising image of Noah, with just as much evidence.
Old, associated with water and the end of the world, uncaring about humanity, etc. It fits.
What I learned from this is that creationists are profoundly delusional and have extreme difficulty separating their fanciful beliefs about how the world should be from how the world actually is.
If Noah were real, then at the time and place he was supposed to live, he may have been white haired, but he almost certainly wouldn’t have been white skinned. Of course, this would go against the whole “curse” narrative that doomed only some of his descendants to be brown…
But Hammy still manages to impress the rubes you know, and that helps his bank balance better than telling the truth.
Once you believe in virgin births, resurrections and angels, it’s a short step to believing just about anything, evidence be damned. This is why I dislike Christianity in particular and just about every religion in general. The cost of buying in is to lose your sense of understanding how the world really works. Even those who can compartmentalize their religious beliefs have the taint of foolishness.
As far as I know, they still have not beat this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATLAS-I
And no metal was involved!
Also… when I saw that bust, the first thing I thought was “but that IS a frail old man – look at all those wrinkles and crows’ feet round his eyes!”…
“He didn’t, you dolt. Apple did.”
When the Apple team was building their graphical user interface, the button we now know as “OK” was originally labeled “Do It.” It was switched because testing showed nobody liked being called a dolt!
http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Do_It.txt
I would love to see a test of the seaworthiness of this ark replica. I have no expertise in the field, so I have no basis to judge it myself. Of course, the engineering, materials, and methods used for the construction of the replica are all modern, so most likely none of the replica accurately portrays how the ark was supposedly constructed or would have performed.
I wonder, does Ken Ham really believe any of that guff? Or is it all just a cynical ploy to separate the rubes from their money, to his advantage? I mean, this guy is a cult leader, eh.
Even if it sinks, it tells nothing on how it would have behaved at the time of the Flood, since the sea back then behaved like the Dead Sea today, on account of all of the world’s salt being diluted in only the waters of the Earth, while the waters of Heaven that poured down during the Flood were pure. Moreover, it explains why Noah was anxious to find a place to land, as the salt began to precipitate when the storm ended, thus reducing the capacity of the sea to keep the Ark afloat. Furthermore, the methane build-up in the Ark’s lower chambers would have drastically increased its buyoancy.
Ham is forever arguing that his outfit is teaching people to think ‘correctly’. It’s the behaviour of cult-leaders and egotists (not just Christian ones).
The Tillamook Air Museum is a wooden structure that could easily house half a dozen of Ham’s white elephants.
I do think ancient peoples were technologically less advanced than we are today, but it isn’t evolution that says that, it is the historical evidence.
When Ham says “evolutionary view of history” I suspect that he is applying his own misunderstanding of what scientists say evolution is to history. Basically that he’s not arguing biology here, he’s instead saying that the idea that history is where there is steady progress from a less advanced state to a more advanced state is wrong and that in fact in ancient times they were smarter and more advanced than we are now.
If you take as read that he thinks that evolution is about moving along a path of “less advanced” to “more advanced” then his comment makes some sense. He’s got an X-men comics level of understanding of evolution, and that’s how he’s using the term.
How many Americans would agree with Ken Ham?
50?
50,000?
50,000,000?
Awful lot of gopher steel in this structure
It is too authentic! Ham’s engineers went to Mount Ararat and found a gopherwood USB stick.
I’d love to see them try to build that monstrosity using period-appropriate tools and techniques.
Isn’t Ham the name of the son that “didn’t cover up Noah’s nakedness” or something like that? And for that, despised and the father of the “dark races” etc? IRONIC. Perhaps Ken is one of those descendants?
Oh what a stain on his soul!
Well, I’m sure my jaw would drop. Followed by head-shaking and laughter.
It’s more general than that. He has a big bucket of things called “evolutionary” which is shorthand for “anything Ken Ham doesn’t agree with”.
@ #7:
Check up on the Wyoming and the Great Eastern, the two largest documented wooden craft (with much reinforcing metal) ever built and note their fatal structural problems and total lack of seaworthiness.
What’s jaw-dropping about Ham’s ham-handed view is his and creationists’ total lack of understanding of wood’s limitations as a structural material.
I’ve been wondering how the bible extant at the time of Noah was able to survive? Did he have a copy conveniently on the arc? Otherwise, it would have been destroyed by the flood?
.
Or is this another miracle that proves that god must exist?
Peterh@#20
Check up on the Wyoming and the Great Eastern, the two largest documented wooden craft (with much reinforcing metal) ever built and note their fatal structural problems and total lack of seaworthiness.
The Great Eastern had several huge accomplishments over noah’s ark. For one thing, it laid the transatlantic cable and demonstrated the possibility of intercontinental communications. For another, it actually existed. It’s hard to be seaworthy when you are carrying a 2000+ mile cable arcing 2 miles to the bottom of The Atlantic.
Cthulhu’s Ark? I’d read it. I might even (attempt to) write it. [Jots down note.]
Anyone else wanna bet that this ‘ark’ will leak when it rains?
busterggi @24:
Nah, they covered it in Tyvek, that ancient waterproofing material, so there is a good chance that it will not leak.
Ah, but this was special wood, available only about the time of Noah and only in the local area where he was building. This special wood was stronger than steel yet was cutable and shapable using the tools of the time. Unfortunately, it was all used up in building the ark so it’s unknown today.
Damn, it’s easy to explain something when you don’t have to supply proof.
Ham’s ark is 450 feet long, 150 feet wide and about 8 storeys high (80 feet?). The Metropol Parasol is 490 x 230 x 85 feet (and a damn sight more impressive a structure).
The lying ignoramus can’t even type three words into Google.
‘What I learned from this is that creationists are profoundly delusional and have extreme difficulty separating their fanciful beliefs about how the world should be from how the world actually is.’
Wait, you just learned this?
To be fair, even as an atheist, I’d look at the gargantuan vessel Ham couldn’t have even begun without availing himself of 21st-century heavy equipment and materials, and wonder aloud how Noah could have built such an impressive ship. (Since, obviously, he had neither.)
But Ham, hearing that, would undoubtedly interpret the question as fervent awe rather than skepticism.
From the Panda’s Thumb article linked in #14
I am sure a search for other translation errors will vindicate Ken Ham’s claim that Noah had access to other modern technology.
According to Wikipedia the Great Eastern was a double hulled “iron” (i would assume actually steel) ship.
J.E. Gordon in Structures: Or Why Things Don’t Fall Down attributes the atrocious leakage of wooden ships to a lack of understanding of shear by the naval architects of the day. Yaweh could have provided this knowledge to Noah. This advanced structural knowledge along with the germ theory of disease were originally in the old testament, but were removed to make room for more important information such as the the construction details of the Ark of the Covenant, how many people, horses, goats etc. were in each tribe, and which animals were clean and unclean.
Ham’s ‘ship’ would have a great problem with floating considering all the concrete used in it’s construction. Good thing it’s way above high water, even after the glaciers melt.
But it’s Apple. Why didn’t they just tell their customers they shouldn’t want to not be called a dolt?
Lest we forget, this project involved Gawd. The Ark could have been constructed of chicken wire and it would have been hurricane proof and sea worthy. The laws of physics (specifically, fluid mechanics) do not apply. Though not recorded in The Holy Scriptures, I’m willing to bet it also flew, when necessary.
I wonder if Hammy will put a few lightning conductors in the upperworks? It’ll all go Touchdown Jesus on him otherwise.
Uhm… Did they notice the recent movie starring Russel Crowe as Noah?
@12: “When Ham says “evolutionary view of history” I suspect that he is applying his own misunderstanding of what scientists say evolution is to history.”
To Ken Ham and most YECs, there are two overarching worldviews: the creationist view and the “evolutionary” view. The latter is the entire edifice of human knowledge that contradicts YEC, including history, linguistics, and every branch of science.
It’s one part conspiracy theory and one part projection. Creationists start with a dogmatic conclusion and then work backward to rationalize it, and they assume that’s what everyone else does too.
So, will “Noah” be viewed by Ham in his full nakedness?
Aside from Ham’s idiocy, I do have one thought that I wonder about.
What is the largest possible concrete ship possible at our current level of technology?
Maybe I should contact the Drexel University concrete canoe team and see if anyone’s scaled upward.
That said, making a concrete boat isn’t supremely hard, we made concrete ships in WWI and WWII. What’s hard is making a concrete submarine that doesn’t stay sunk. ;)
Well, if you have in your fantasy a man living to 800+ years (Methusula) you would I suppose imagine him to age quite slowly so still looking fairly young at, say 500 years would fit in with the fantasy. Of course there is no actual evidence but I don’t think we can call Ham out on that minor point.
As an example, Tolkien imagined that Aragorn lived 210 years in his tale and was in his late 80’s at the time of the main action and yet looked and acted much younger, as he still did when he became King at 90. He was (in the tale) descended from the men of Numenor who lived much longer lives still, if I recall right.
And I think it’s a fairly common fantasy trope. Of course both tales referred to above are fantasy. The men of old were thought to be purer than we degenerate descendants don’t you know. That seems to be part of every religion as well as a lot of other fantasy.
On wood, we have much better and stronger woods today due to layering as with Plywood. I doubt if Noah had a plywood mill. Well I doubt he even existed, of course.
Ham does claim that Noah may* have had technology more advanced than ours.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2016/03/ken-ham-explains-noah-probably-had-more-sophisticated-tools-than-we-do-today.html
*note use of weasel word.
The thing is, Ham has the opposite view of history that he thinks secular people do. He thinks that humans that lived millennia ago were genetically superior to humans that live today, and we’ve been “corrupted”, or some such shit.
Hey PZ, I think this actually ties in fairly well to the earlier discussions on intelligence and genetics. Ham seems to think that just by being less genetically corrupted than modern humans, Noah was a super-genius who could perform impossible feats of engineering. I guess that implies that all of those physicists and engineers that talk about strength-to-weight ratios making the ark impossible just don’t have high enough IQs.
I also get the feeling that Ham actually believes that antediluvian civilization was some sort of bronze-age steampunk society with access to advanced engineering and chemistry. For some reason, said advanced society decided to build a boat the size of an aircraft carrier out of wood. Apparently, the antediluvians’ advanced technological knowledge didn’t extend to metalworking.
I erred on my largest wooden vessels. They were the Wyoming at about 100 meters and the Great Republic (not Eastern) at about 102 meters. Both were lost at sea due to structural problems caused by the inappropriate use of wood for so large a structure in a fluid environment. There were a few other ships of similar size in the 19th Century but they relied heavily on metal reinforcements and keelsons or iron cladding; all were structurally unstable.
We have access to stone and metal tools from thousands of years in the past, along with remarkably well-preserved ancient buildings and traces of things like artwork and pottery. Modern technology is made from incredibly durable materials that don’t break down easily. How convenient that we haven’t found the ruins of collapsed skyscrapers or the remains of old cell phones buried along with ancient Neanderthal and homo erectus skeletons. Apparently, the flood waters were moving fast enough to completely shred all of the concrete buildings and metal cars into powder, but still left all of the buried animal bones intact.
The main problem with Ham’s claims is that they’re pure speculation without a single bit of empirical evidence to back them up, and all of the excuses that he uses to explain why there isn’t any don’t hold water. You don’t get to claim that something happened just because you want it to have happened.
Ed Seedhouse
Read the bible – it is mentioned in Laminations.
I suspect Ham believes that in antediluvian times, humans bred with angels, resulting in stronger, super-intellgient, super-tall people – think “there were giants in those days”, and “how do you explain pygmies + dwarves”.
In that mythology, the presence of “angelic blood” enabled the development of technology and tools we don’t have today.
It has occurred to me that, if anything, popular conception of the history of technological advancement is actually further from “monotonic increase” than the truth, not closer as Ham seems to think. I’m alluding to the popular conception of the “Dark Ages”, when classical civilisation collapsed and we forgot everything. In fact, although knowledge was lost, the extent was far from the catastrophic descent that most people think it was. It’s also widely known that there are a number of methods of construction and crafts that were lost through the ages, or that seem counterintuitively advanced. So Ham doesn’t even understand the popular perception of history, let alone actual history.
OTOH, the Russell Crowe as Noah theory does solve at least one problem – he brought all those marsupials with him on the trip to the Middle East, and took them back home after the flood.
@Ed, 39
That would work, though normal age in the Bible seems to fluctuate pretty hard. Abraham, for example, was considered very old at 100, to the point where it was laughable that he and his wife could have a child, and lived to be 175.
“Wormwood” is a mistranslation. The word used in the Bible that gets translated as “worm” can actually refer to any small piece of something. So a better translation is “particle board”. Noah did what any suburbanite on a tight budget would do: he went to Ikea, where they were having a nice sale on the Årk collection. But he lost his Allen wrench before he completed the dinosaur add-on, and so he tried to cobble it together with baling wire and Duck tape, with predictably tragic consequences.
Supposedly the word that gets rendered as “gopher” could be anything. Nobody knows. Seasoned wood, fresh-cut wood, oak wood, divinely-supplied wood, squared timbers, or anything related to wood. It doesn’t necessarily mean any species, and it certainly doesn’t mean a North American rodent.
I saw one Noah movie where the inside of the ark was just branches with slabs of bark leaned against them. It was so God-awful bad! I wonder if Ken Ham would take that as authoritative, or just say somebody made it up.
Seriously, the Flood could be dropped from the Bible with nothing lost – actually some gain. It is certainly not as important as Ken Ham makes it out to be. Maybe he really likes the genocide. (Somebody used to call it the soggycide.)
Gopherwood, Wormwood….
Note to self: Do not confuse the Bible with Calvin and Hobbes. One is among the greatest treatises of morality and philosophy in the Western canon, the other has angels.