Tim Lovett wraps up his response to a blogger regarding the seaworthiness of Noah’s Ark.
Plans for Ham's ark remain a tightly guarded secret
Seems like lots of public information published on the AiG website remains a secret to you. Pictures have been on the website for over two years.
but there is no doubt that it will be built upon a robust foundation. Northern Kentucky experiences freeze/ thaw cycles in the winter months and that heaving alone would soon negatively affect the integrity of the structure.
Noah probably built the Ark in a high place on a robust launching platform to minimize the chance of dashing against nearby obstacles. So, yes, Noah would have needed a robust foundation, and so will the (much lighter) AiG structure. But the Ark Encounter is not a ship-proving test either; it is an immersive experience with a structure based on reasoned design.
There are no Marine engineers on planet earth that have concluded that the ark could be seaworthy, that is, without some supernatural agent suspending the laws of physics and nature.
Now is a good time for someone to tell you that there are naval architects and marine engineers. Marine engineers work on ship machinery, whereas seaworthiness is the domain of naval architects.
For example, it was naval architects at the world-class ship research center KRISO (renamed MOERI in 2005) in Korea who studied Noah’s Ark in 1992 and declared the biblical specifications sound (see this summary for more information). The head of the study (Dr. S. W. Hong, an evolutionist) went on to run the place.
It is impossible for a ship of that material and construction
What construction? If you mean a rectangular box made from twenty-foot scantlings as you propose, then this is certainly doing it the hard way. Or perhaps you mean single-layer carvel construction with sails, like Pretoria and Orlando—or Wyoming or Great Republic even. Either way, this does not rule out other ways to build a seaworthy Ark. Nor does it preclude effective shear-resisting hull structures in wood. Here are a few examples:
Another problem for these “oversized” carvel ships was weak frames.10 To make the curved frame profiles, many short segments were bolted together, resulting in lateral flexibility (i.e., they could go out of shape). This could have been addressed by installing lateral shear walls at regular intervals (transverse bulkheads). The Chinese were doing that at least fourteen centuries earlier, which is twelve centuries before Benjamin Franklin “invented” it.11
So maybe Noah used ancient bulkheads and ancient planking.
So out of the blackness of the Internet, you call the director general of research at MOERI, Dr. S. W. Hong and his team, “plain nuts”?
In summary, 300 feet (91 m) may well be the practical limit for single layer carvel hull construction, but more appropriate construction methods would extend that boundary by at least 50 percent.