Saturday, April 27, 2024

London Storm Pretends to be at least remotely serious (about the Flood) — Roughly First Half of Video


Will This Change Your Mind About Noah's Ark?
London Storm | 18 April 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDGKLt5BPrg


2:18 There is a huge difference between abusing one's free will like Cain did in a one time (hopefully) fratricide, and misusing it like some collectives were arguably doing just before the Flood.

Meaning, they were arguably making everyone who still believed what Adam and Eve had believed about how to live your life miserable. Engaging or requiring their goons to engage in cannibalism to get ready for that task.

Harmageddon is not about someone taking the mark simply abusing his free will to do the wrong thing. It's about those having taken the mark banding together to make life miserable (and short) for Christians. The Flood and that Battle are essentially not very different. In each case, there is a judgement on persecutors.

2:50 "a fantastical story, and not in a good way"

I guess you threw your example of Silmarillion out when you had read Akallabêth?

3:48 Like the drowning of Númenor kind of did involve babies drowning.

But it stopped getting the faithful killed in human sacrifice along perhaps some other unlucky ones.

6:31 Who said Noah had to collect animals across the world?

Maybe the Nodian civilisation had a zoo nearby (well, relatively, the Ark project was probably only tolerated because it was in an isolated spot, on the then highest mountain) and Noah is able to buy lots from there, if it wasn't where he was around.

6:42 "all the animals I have seen in one very small place"

The point of dismissing the bathtub ark is, the Ark wasn't small. I have seen LOTS of dogs, and I think there was exactly one couple of dogs or maybe overall canids on the Ark. Lots of hedgehogs, there was one couple of hedgehogs (and since hedgehogs aren't now one species, but 17, this is accurate). So, it would definitely not be all the animals I had seen either.

7:06 The highest peak back then was NOT Mount Everest, that's post-Flood. 30 000 feet is pretty accurate on Mount Everest, but is definitely way beyond any peak in the pre-Flood world.

7:33 AND it nowhere says all the water came from rain.

Genesis 7:11 In the six hundredth year of the life of Noe, in the second month, in the seventeenth day of the month, all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the flood gates of heaven were opened: 12 And the rain fell upon the earth forty days and forty nights.

I find it pretty convincing that, as modern YEC have suggested:
  • subterranean water reservoirs were opened up and the water started to fill things
  • but at the same time the breaking up involved LOADS of eruptions
  • so lots of water goes up into the air and then down again, and this is the process that involves 40 days and 40 nights.


  • So, the rain didn't create the height that was reached, and that height was not Mount Everest either.

    7:44 If you have trouble surviving at air plane height, it's not because of the absolute height above the centre of our globe, it's because most of the air is below that height. If water were "that high" (actually less, as Mt Everest is post-Flood) it would squeeze the air up, so there is not that problem.

    7:49 Mariana Trench and other depths of the oceans we have in our post-Flood world is where the water went. Seas were also shallower in the pre-Flood world.

    8:01 No, you have been very inattentive at what they actually offer. Lots of what I answered you would come from them or CMI. It's you who prefer a medium level of realism, like when you can invent problems and ignore answers to them.

    London Storm
    @danger.snakes
    this is some high level cope

    the flood is a myth and no remotely serious person believes it happened

    Hans-Georg Lundahl
    @hglundahl
    @danger.snakes Oh, I thought you were into argument, your video made me believe that.

    Is calling me "no remotely serious person" supposed to be your version of an ad hominem?

    👑 2pacaveli 👑
    @2pacaveli257
    [triple laughter to tears emotica]

    Hans-Georg Lundahl
    @hglundahl
    Do you have any arguments, or just a mood of laughter?


    8:46 You are forgetting that it was not a ship, was not meant to navigate, so could have very thick wood, was all the time (except the last part near the landing place) on very deep water and not risking the chaos of coastal waves, so, no, again you play on words rather than verify what they mean.

    On hyperrealism, I grade you C.

    9:02 Is that a challenge to displace the Ark encounter into the Pacific?

    9:33 What's YOUR criterium for historical proof?

    I did not come across a single bit of a history centred video on your list.

    If you don't know what geometrical proof is like, I might not prove Pythagoras' theorem to you.

    If you blurt "that's just an allegation" like a bad math pupil would say "that's just a diagramme" ....

    10:50 430 feet for Wyoming is close to 450 feet for Ark, yes.

    10:58 I think your objection is based on unwitting or wilful ignorance of baraminology.

    11:22 Whatever you were going to compare it to, nothing here is "conspiracy theories" any more than Dark Matter is. A complication in a theory and taking it into account does not make it a theory born from paranoid suspicions against some outgroupers.

    11:26 "there is no real evidence for the things we believe"
    a) would not constitute a conspiracy theory, even if it is part of it;
    b) is anyway only your strawman.

    11:43 You sound very much like some of us Geocentrics when we comment on mainstream astrologers, pardon, astronomers, who now believe in Dark Matter.

    12:54 Did you never yet hear this objection to us?

    Wyoming (schooner) is on wikipedia. Here is a history in bullet points:

    1909 – 15 December. Launched at the Percy and Small Shipyard with its masts stepped. First master: Captain Angus McLeod of Somerville, Massachusetts.[1]
    1909 – 21 December. Maiden voyage to Newport News, Virginia[6]
    1916 – In charter of International Paper Company
    1917 – April. Sold to France & Canada Steamship Co. for about $350,000 (probably about $420,000). By 1 October 1919, it had earned more than twice that amount, and its owners chartered it to load coal at Norfolk for Genoa at $23.50 per ton.
    1921 – Sold to Captain A. W. Frost & Co., Portland, Maine.
    1924 – Left Norfolk, Virginia, under command of Captain Charles Glaesel, for Saint John, New Brunswick, with a cargo of coal.
    1924 – 11 March. In order to ride out a nor'easter, it anchored off Chatham, Massachusetts, in the Nantucket Sound, together with the five-masted schooner Cora F. Cressey which had left Norfolk at the same time as Wyoming. Captain H. Publicover on the Cora F. Cressey weighed anchor at dusk and stood out to sea. Wyoming is believed to have foundered east of the Pollock Rip Lightship and the crew of 14 was lost.[7][8][9]
    2003 - Wyoming wreck located near Monomoy Island by American Underwater Search and Survey Ltd.[10][11]


    Let's check depth as well:
    Pollock Rip Shoal (also on wiki)

    The channel at Pollock Rip Shoals is centered about three miles (4.8 km) east of the southerly end of Monomoy Island in Chatham, Massachusetts.[1] The channel, which runs east–west, is about eight miles (13 km) south of the Chatham Lighthouse.[1] Vessels passing around the Cape Cod coastline use the channel as a passage from the Atlantic Ocean to Nantucket Sound.[1] The Pollock Rip Lightship marked the eastern approach to the channel from 1849 to 1969; it has since been replaced by a lighted buoy. The Stonehorse Lightship had previously identified the southeasterly end of the channel until October 1963, when it was removed by the U.S. Coast Guard and replaced with a small buoy.[1] The channel extends six miles (9.7 km) through the shoals and is 30 feet (9.1 m) deep and 2,000 feet (610 m) wide. It was completed in 1925.[1]


    "The channel extends six miles (9.7 km) through the shoals and is 30 feet (9.1 m) deep"

    So, the seas that made Wyoming flounder were arguably even less than 9.1 m deep!

    That makes the sea more turbulent.

    12:58 Check out 1 October 1919, after the sales statement from 1917, April.

    13:06 There was only one voyage for the Ark.

    As it was not a ship, did not navigate against the waves, it could have thicker wood. Hence, and through the added pitch, no leaks to pump either. Plus there probably was some kind of pump system on the Ark anyway.

    You mentioned "Noah's people" ... we don't know much about them. Those whom he was born among, that is. If my model for carbon dates is correct, the Flood was followed by Gravettian, Solutrean, Magdalenian within the remaining lifespan of Noah. For pre-Flood men, we have traces of what could be savages, but we have not found the civilisation. A bit like finding the teepee of Chingachgook, but _not_ the palaces of the Hanoveran dynasty or their nearby London. Because the civilisation was what God targetted most, as that was where most of the Totalitarian and Inhuman Corruption was.

    13:15 Before you speak of lower decks, as if it were a ship, how about checking the Bible for the actual shape of the Ark?

    9:33 to 13:15 I note, you quickly shifted the subject from historicity as per historic criteria to possibility as per technical, for instance naval ones.

    13:32 It was the Wyoming. If you tried to look up the Maine, you would not have found the relevant information.

    However, Wyoming actually was built in precisely Maine.

    13:47 The weight is actually an asset, since it augments the rolling period. And the longer the rolling period, the less likely a vessel is to roll upside down, so called capsizing.

    Now, since a water line halfway up the vessel is pretty common, the Biblical dimensions, that waterline, would tell you the displacement and weight.

    300 * 50 * 30 * 1.5³ / 2 = 759 375 ft³= 21 503.11 m³ => 21 503.11 metric tonnes.

    I actually went with a longer cubit measure, probably two feet, when I calculated the rolling period, it was in my calculation "between 11.71 and 12.82 seconds."

    I quoted this sentence:

    A passenger ship will typically have a long rolling period for comfort, perhaps 12 seconds while a tanker or freighter might have a rolling period of 6 to 8 seconds.


    15:35 How about explaining how the Altai mountains could have been flooded?

    15:45 Yes, it actually has some relevance for the chances of the Ark, that event in 2004!

    There was a boy on a wooden bed. He didn't get into the shore where he would have been smashed, he got out on deep water. And out there, tsunami waves are not damaging. They are hardly noticable.

    MIRACLE OF THE LITTLE BOY LOST & FOUND
    By Social Links for Leonard Greene
    Published Dec. 29, 2004, 5:00 a.m. ET
    https://nypost.com/2004/12/29/miracle-of-the-little-boy-lost-found/


    16:39 Genesis 6 — an Ark that can float in a global Flood.
    Gilgamesh tablet XI — a "giant coracle" that absolutely couldn't do that.

    IF there is a genuine account, it makes sense if it is more realistic than the ones that get garbled.

    If there ISN'T why would the rehash be more realistic?

    No comments: