Friday, August 15, 2014

Ark Encounter Breaks Ground In Kentucky

The construction has begun!  WKYT in Kentucky reports this:
Workers are clearing land in northern Kentucky to build a long-stalled tourist attraction featuring Noah's Ark.

Ken Ham, head of the Christian ministry Answers in Genesis, posted video of the excavation work on his Facebook page this week.

It is the first sign of large-scale construction activity at the site in Grant County since plans for the 510-foot long biblical ark were announced by Answers in Genesis in 2010. The project had been delayed when private donations did not keep pace with the construction timeline.
510 feet? The relevant text in Genesis reads this way:
14So make yourself an ark of cypress wood; make rooms in it and coat it with pitch inside and out. 15This is how you are to build it: The ark is to be three hundred cubits long, fifty cubits wide and thirty cubits high.
The note at the bottom of this chapter in most bibles indicates that to be 450 feet. On the AiG site, Ham writes that his Ark Encounter will show the ark as a real ship that was seaworthy and that it will be built “according to the dimensions in the Bible.”  He then clearly shows an image of an ark that is 510 feet long.  I wonder why Ham's ark is sixty feet longer? Surely if they are adhering to the literal reading of the passage, this represents a deviation. The biblical (and generally Mesopotamian) cubit was 18 inches long.  It is only if you use the Sumerian cubit of 20.42 that you arrive at the length dimensions of Ham's ark.  So, the (admittedly somewhat jocular) question is, if Ham is so bent on adhering to the letter of the biblical story, why has he gone outside of the Bible for his length measurement?  And, for that matter, since his ark is sixty feet longer, and, according to the picture, he hasn't adjusted his width and height measurements, won't that throw off his hydrodynamics?  This represents almost a 12% increase in length.  Would his ark really be as seaworthy as he says?  For that matter, if your dimensions are not that important, why not make it round?

All right, enough fun for the day.


  1. They are certainly digging themselves a large hole.

    Meanwhile the ICR are twisting or ignoring Genesis 6 19-20 (see latest comment under this, which is unrelated to the - recent - blog post in question:

  2. Too bad there were no 'Bridges' for Ken Ham to have jumped from!

  3. Headless Unicorn Guy2:55 PM

    What I'd like to know is why Ham's Ark has an ancient Mediterranean galley hull, complete with ram bow.
    The Ark didn't need to maneuver, only to float. And "Ark" means "box" in the original accounts. A more accurate reconstruction would have been a raft hull with a boxlike superstructure; I remember a pic of an old maritime museum that followed that assumption in their "Noah's Ark" diorama. And I think that recent movie "Noah" also took that route.

    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    2. And, ya know, for that matter, did the thing have an anchor? If there really was a world-wide flood with ocean currents, the ark, over the course of a year, would have floated a LONG WAY from the Middle East. Why didn't it?

  4. The Royal Egyptian Cubit is pi/6 m. 300cubits = 157m = 515 feet.
    Ron Wyatt's Feature is 515 feet.
    => See
    The largest wooden vessel made in recent times is the Rochambeau at 115m long.
    The rest is up to you.