Noah's ark makes no sense

It is because of this that I'm now an atheist.

• One ancient book makes some popular assertions about the nature and purpose of one ancient culture's God.
  
• One story in that ancient book contains multiple assertions contrary to nature of the physical world.
  
• Therefore, no human conception of God can be said to proven.
  

What's the difference between historical fiction, and history. When writers believe that they're merely making notes, or when writers are politically or otherwise biased?

Degrees I suppose. Though degrees do matter.

Noah's ark makes no sense.  My contentions with Noah's ark are:

1) Noah's ark takes up less space than the titanic, yet holds 4x the passenger count.  The titanic was built by many people with great technology.  Noah was the sole builder of the ark and he did not have access to the same amount of technology.  He probably did not have enough time even in his long life to build the ark.

2) In the Titanic, all the passengers used the bathroom.  All the animals on the other hand, pooped on the floor.  Noah would have to pick up the poop of tens of thousands of animals.  He did not have enough time to get this done and he and his crew would have been overrun with poop picking up all on their own.

3) Noah and his crew would have to pick up the poop of tens of thousands of animals every single day, probably twice a day or so all in the dark.  Electricity was not invented back then, and there was no light getting into the ark except from maybe a window even though window were invented after the flood supposedly happened.

It is because of this that I'm now an atheist.

Thoughts on this?

ell, how their religion is depicted and claimed to happen with history, 'is where theists would be biased I suppose.

Well, in war and politics, some say history is written by the winners.

So creation ex nihilo makes perfect sense but somehow you draw the line at a boat?

To me, it's evidence that God isin't real because how could this happen in an infallible bible?

he saved a remnant from its number of humans and animals etc and placed them into a boat.   The story in its context is one of judgment and grace. And that totally makes sense. 

he saved a remnant from its number of humans and animals etc and placed them into a boat.   The story in its context is one of judgment and grace. And that totally makes sense. 

How was there enough space for:

-All of the animals

-All of their food for 40 days, which for the carnivores means more animals, which require more food

In addition, how can Noah pick up the poop of all those animals?  There are tens of thousands of them.

The story makes no sense and I therefore don't think the bible is correct.

so the Vietnam War did not happen? 

were upon the waters for 371 days, which your position is worsened!

I agreed with you that a literal understanding of Noah's Ark was difficult for modern man to understand. This is why I said it needs to be understood contextually and with its purpose in mind. 

Noah's ark makes no sense.  My contentions with Noah's ark are:

1) Noah's ark takes up less space than the titanic, yet holds 4x the passenger count.  The titanic was built by many people with great technology.  Noah was the sole builder of the ark and he did not have access to the same amount of technology.  He probably did not have enough time even in his long life to build the ark.

2) In the Titanic, all the passengers used the bathroom.  All the animals on the other hand, pooped on the floor.  Noah would have to pick up the poop of tens of thousands of animals.  He did not have enough time to get this done and he and his crew would have been overrun with poop picking up all on their own.

3) Noah and his crew would have to pick up the poop of tens of thousands of animals every single day, probably twice a day or so all in the dark.  Electricity was not invented back then, and there was no light getting into the ark except from maybe a window even though window were invented after the flood supposedly happened.