Biblical engineering: when Sunday school meets shipyard science.
As we learn more about ancient shipbuilding we must ask the question, “When Noah constructed the Ark, wouldn’t he have used the technology of his day? Could he follow the Lord’s directions and actually build a ship able to withstand the cataclysmic tempest?” Following the example of Drs. Henry Morris and John Whitcomb’s ground-breaking book, The Genesis Flood, Ark researcher Tim Lovett applies new findings to the contours and interior design of the Ark, while maintaining an unwavering commitment to the Word of God.
Practical Effects
Actual wooden Ark models being stress-tested in pools.
Production
CGI flood sequences on a 2007 documentary budget.
Director
Paul Varnum
Trivia, insights & behind the scenes
This was produced by Answers in Genesis, the Kentucky-based ministry that later built the life-size Ark Encounter theme park—a $100 million escalation of this exact vision.
Tim Lovett, the featured 'Ark researcher,' is actually a mechanical engineer by training, not a biblical scholar or archaeologist.
No ratings yet
Reactions from the web
It was the worst shape for an unpowered vessel that couldn’t be turned into the wind and waves. Round would have been better.
@davidgardner863 2
If we translate cubits into feet, we hae a craft 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet deep For the sake of comparison, I worked on a cruise ship, the Celebrity Millenium. It is 946 feet long, 105 feet wiide, and 125 feet deep. It held roughly 3000 people, crew and passengers, when full. Again, for the sake of comparison, the Millenium was about 12.5 million cubic feet. Noah's ark was about 1.5 million cubic feet. I know the Answers in Genesis people are a bit shy of saying how many animals were on board the ark, but it would have been difficutl to house more than the number of people aboard the Millenium. To top it off, the ark had to carry a years worth of food and water. The Millenium was in port on a regular basis, back at Port Everglades every ten days, so food storage wan't a problem, or at least not as big a problem. Now I don't mind the religious having miracles. I don't believe them but one cannot disprove a miracle. However, I do object when miracles are presented as science. The biggest single takeaway from creation science is that it is a refuge for those who really don't believe. They need a rational explanation for something, which if indeed it happened, requires a miracle.
@throckmortensnivel2850
04:21; did he just say god's infallible word?
@apexwar_ 2
Sign in to join the discussion — comments are spoiler-gated to your watch progress.
Discussion starters
US
