Hambo’s Ark Differs Slightly from Noah’s

We’re not told who wrote this thing, but it’s at the website of Ark Encounter — the creationist tourist attraction built by Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the ayatollah of Appalachia, the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else.

Their article is titled Noah’s Ark vs. the Ark Encounter: What’s the Difference? Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

At the Ark Encounter, one of the main reasons we built our life-size Noah’s Ark was to answer common questions related to the global flood. As you enter Noah’s world aboard the massive Ark, you’ll tour three decks filled with scores of exceptional exhibit bays. These stunning exhibits allow you to experience what Noah’s life may have been like. Near our half-ark model on the Deck One, you’ll find new signs showing the difference between Noah’s Ark and our Ark. So, what might the differences be?

We assume Noah’s ark didn’t have those exhibits, but otherwise — from what we’ve been reading at ol’ Hambo’s website — we just assumed that Hambo’s ark is identical to Noah’s — but without a few tons of animal waste cluttering up the place. We’re shocked — shocked! — to learn that there might be other differences. The article says:

Noah’s Ark was designed to protect humans and animals during the global flood [So we’ve been told], while the Ark at our theme park is a building that looks like a ship and is optimized for guests’ safety and educational experience.

Hambo’s ark also has a ticket office in front so the visitors can be separated from their money. Noah probably didn’t have one of those. Anyway, the article tells us:

Inside Noah’s Ark, there was a living and working space for eight people and thousands of animals in addition to the enclosures and systems [Systems?] to care for the animals. Our life-size Noah’s Ark holds just a fraction of the enclosures that the real ark had in order to provide adequate space for our guests.

They don’t mention that the biblical ark had only one window — which likely made the atmosphere inside somewhat ghastly. The article continues:

Noah’s Ark might have contained practical, short ramps near the bow and stern with steep inclines between the floors, while the Ark Encounter includes long ramps to accommodate guests and provide spectacular views of the inside of the structure.

Noah’s ark has short steep ramps? How did they lift the daily output of dinosaur waste up to the deck for removal? Let’s read on:

Noah’s family might have had a few lighted areas and used portable lights to guide their way through the ark [carrying torches through an atmosphere thick with methane], while at the Ark Encounter, we have many light sconces throughout for high visibility.

We’ll skip a couple of paragraphs about how long it supposedly took Noah to build his ark. If anyone cares they say it was 75 years. The rest of the article is promotional stuff to encourage you to visit. So what have we learned? Anything? Come on, dear reader. Let us know.

Copyright © 2019. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

13 responses to “Hambo’s Ark Differs Slightly from Noah’s

  1. I’ll play!

    Noah’s ark: A fictional boat that never existed outside the story in the Buy-Bull.
    Ark Encounter: A building, that LOOKs like a boat, paid for (partially) with tax payer dollars, built with modern day technology.

  2. “Systems”
    Sh*t shovels, many

  3. Actually I fixed that problem years ago, but I haven’t seen it adopted at any creationist website: Waste Disposal on Noah’s Ark — Solved!

  4. From the diary of Mrs. Shem, we learn this:

    “One of the juvenile velociraptor’s got a little too boisterous while we were playing fetch yesterday. He skittered across the deck, and ran smack bang into a rhino who wandered up from lower deck by mistake. The upshot was a cute little raptor with a broken leg. Poor old young raptor! He was a picture of woes!

    We put the leg in a cast, and confined the raptor to a wheelchair. Fortunately — during the 75 years it took to build the ark — we’d put in ramps between decks to allow for wheelchair access, so it made things that much easier.

    And yes, everyone wrote messages of support and drew funny pictures on the plaster cast.”

  5. Sour Hammy says without posting he wrote it “Near our half-ark model on the Deck One, you’ll find new signs” ..new signs ! new signs!! Quick KB… Load up the kids and JJs cousin and lets get down the interstate to Kentucky to see the new signs in the ark…..

  6. Dave Luckett

    Of course the real difference between Ham’s building and any sort of bronze age ship is that Ham’s con is held rigid on concrete pilings and is fastened with steel bolts, plates and brackets. If it either met an ocean swell or wasn’t held together with steel, it would rapidly fall apart. Ordinary weather in northern Kentucky is eating away at it constantly, as it is. Alternately wet and dry, warm and cold timbers swell and shrink, warp and twist. Joints move, planking buckles. The wind alone will bend the frames. I don’t know if it ever freezes there, but water freezing in seams will force them apart. I suspect that Ham is already astonished at how much maintenance is needed – but of course he’d never admit it.

    It talks about “light sources”. All ancient artificial light sources were open flames. The Ark, we are told, was caulked – actually covered – with bitumen. Pitch, in other words. A moment’s carelessness, a stumble, a dropped lamp, a minor fumble, and it would all be over. And this in a stormy sea.

    The Ark itself – never mind the Flood – is formed of repeated layers of impossibilities. Nothing like it in construction or materials ever floated on its own. Nothing like it ever could.

  7. BTW the Bible does not describe a ship. That is a modern innovation. The Bible story has an ark, which seems to be a box, with none of the distnctive features of a ship: bow, stern, keel, sails, oars, rudder. Take a look at the pre-modern pictures of the Ark on the web.

  8. Even the holiest man in the world is not holy enough:

    “Noah’s Ark was designed to ….”
    of course should be

    “Noah’s Ark was Intelligently Designed to ….”

    “and is optimized for guests’ safety and educational experience”
    WHOT? I’m shocked! Shocked, I say! Ol’Hambo suggests that the real and Original Noah’s Ark wasn’t optmizied! His lack of faith is disgraceful!

  9. All of that Gopher Steel and Gopher Concrete used in the fake construction are exactly like the original pious fiction. And that thousands of “kinds” to 100 million in only a few thousand years is sure some ludicrously aggressive rate of evolution.

  10. @TomS: “The Bible story has an ark, which seems to be a box …”
    That is correct; an ark is a chest or a box. Recall the ark of the covenant which was used to transport the Hebrew weather deity around the desert. The ancient Hebrews were not a seafaring tribe and as such they were totally clueless about ship building, rather like the HAMster and his loopy drooling followers.

  11. When those Hebrew scribes filched the ark story from Mesopotamia (so much for “thou shalt not steal”), they were canny enough to wring a few changes of their own, and pass off the minor, boring variation as uniquely theirs. So the Meso round-shaped coracle “evolves” into a box-shaped vessel.

    It’s not easy to fit a square peg into a round hole, but damned if they didn’t succeed, and in the process, a later, derivative version becomes the one most people are familiar with, relegating the ur-legend into obscurity.

    Survival of the fittest? Or survival of the s*****t?

  12. The Hebrew word for Noah’s ark is different from the word for the Ark of the Covenent. The word for Noah’s ark is also used only for the basket that the baby Moses was found in.

  13. This is kind of interesting:

    Turns out the ark wood has a 50 year ground contact guarantee, and the mottled color (which looks like someone tried to remove graffiti) will eventually take over the entire structure.

    I’d disagree with the designers, since they were always interested in appealing to people’s sense of awe over the ark, the investment in stain every 4-6 years would have been the correct choice. This technique has been used by medieval cathedral architects for centuries. You create the awe for the power of God with having a dramatically spacious and beautiful building. The Ark may not rot, but the patina looks dreadful. Even if it does someday have a consistent coloration. Of course the concept art of the Ark Encounter had the ark dramatically stained in a consistent and rich dark color. The Ark Encounter now has the look of a weathered and neglected exhibit.

    Of course to Hambo, money is the bottom line.