DiscussMormonism.com

I've tracked down the "long, thin arms" reference.

Dice Torquemada que en un baile dado por los Toltecas, se les apareció el diablo en figura de gigante, y abrazándolos con sus desmesurados brazos, los iba ahogando en medio de la fiesta: despues se dejó ver bajo el aspecto de un muchacho, con la cabeza podrida, y les comunicó la pestilencia; y que, finalmente, a persuasión del mismo diablo abandonaron el país de Tula.

Roughly translated, this reads:

"Torquemada says that in a dance given by the Toltecs, the devil appeared before them in the form of a giant, and embracing them with its disproportionate arms, it was suffocating them in the midst of the party: after that, they saw beneath the appearance of a child, with a rotten face, and it brought them pestilence; and that, finally, being persuaded by this same devil they abandoned the land of Tula."

Essentially, then, Roper and Brown--and apparently Adrienne Mayor--are conflating two different stories involving giants.

Tobin wrote:You do realize they had to feed themselves and had other animals with them as well. Clearly these craft had sufficient room for food and those animals (as well as all the equipment to keep them alive). And they may have brought immature animals with them. A baby elephant weighs about 200 pounds when it is born and an immature animal wouldn't eat nearly as much as a full grown elephant.

Baby elephants are completely dependant on their mothers for the first few years of their lives. Assuming the Jaredite mariners were somehow able to take the place of the mother for the baby elephants, they would conservatively need well over 2,000 gallons of milk just for a pair (how do you suppose they would keep that from spoiling?).

But maybe they were able to find some young elephants that were already weaned off of milk. Then for a pair, they'd only have to worry about supplying about 8,000 gallons of water during their voyage. With the sedentary life, that could probably be cut in half. So, we'll say about 500 cubic feet of storage space.

Next comes food. We'll put that at a very conservative 50 lbs a day. So, for a young pair that is sedentary and eating mostly for survival and not growth, we're looking at 34,400 pounds of food. Something like hay would probably be the easiest (albeit, not most nutritious) option. At about 9.5 cubic feet per 130 lb bale, that'd be another 2,500 cubic feet of space needed (assuming they would be able to compact the bales as efficently as modern technology).

For food and water alone for only a pair of young elephants, without even having to account for living space or the weight of the pair, they would need over 3,000 cubic feet of storage space, that could also accommodate the displacement of 33 tons. And these are likely low-end miracle numbers.

If you wanted, you could probably take these numbers, and use boat max safe load formulas to find the minimum volume of immersed hull one would need one of these saucer boats to have in order to only accommodate the pachyderm friends.

After all of this, it's no wonder they would end up extinct. Within a few generations those genetics would have been more funky than royalty.

Somewhere some idiot at a keyboard is laughing because he got people to engage him in a discussion about the feasibility of a transoceanic voyage with elephants in wooden submarines built in 2200 BC.

Doctor Steuss wrote:

Tobin wrote:You do realize they had to feed themselves and had other animals with them as well. Clearly these craft had sufficient room for food and those animals (as well as all the equipment to keep them alive). And they may have brought immature animals with them. A baby elephant weighs about 200 pounds when it is born and an immature animal wouldn't eat nearly as much as a full grown elephant.

Baby elephants are completely dependant on their mothers for the first few years of their lives. Assuming the Jaredite mariners were somehow able to take the place of the mother for the baby elephants, they would conservatively need well over 2,000 gallons of milk just for a pair (how do you suppose they would keep that from spoiling?).

Reading comprehension. I mentioned the weight of a baby elephant to give you an idea that an immature animal would easily be transported because they don't weigh or consume as much as a full grown adult, not that they were actually taking baby elephants instead.

Doctor Steuss wrote:But maybe they were able to find some young elephants that were already weaned off of milk. Then for a pair, they'd only have to worry about supplying about 8,000 gallons of water during their voyage. With the sedentary life, that could probably be cut in half. So, we'll say about 500 cubic feet of storage space.

Again, we are talking about craft that involved advanced engineering to even be built. It is unlikely the Jaredites could carry enough water for themselves and the animals they took anyway, so they must of had a means (i.e. devices) for obtaining water while on their voyage.

Doctor Steuss wrote:Next comes food. We'll put that at a very conservative 50 lbs a day. So, for a young pair that is sedentary and eating mostly for survival and not growth, we're looking at 34,400 pounds of food. Something like hay would probably be the easiest (albeit, not most nutritious) option. At about 9.5 cubic feet per 130 lb bale, that'd be another 2,500 cubic feet of space needed (assuming they would be able to compact the bales as efficently as modern technology).

Again, given the number of people and other animals and the fact we don't know how large the vessels were, they undoubtedly had a large amount of space for food storage. Also, as I pointed out, it is unlikely they could have carried enough water or been able to store all the waste on board. If these vessels existed, they needed advanced equipment to make them viable.

Doctor Steuss wrote:For food and water alone for only a pair of young elephants, without even having to account for living space or the weight of the pair, they would need over 3,000 cubic feet of storage space, that could also accommodate the displacement of 33 tons. And these are likely low-end miracle numbers.

If you wanted, you could probably take these numbers, and use boat max safe load formulas to find the minimum volume of immersed hull one would need one of these saucer boats to have in order to only accommodate the pachyderm friends.

After all of this, it's no wonder they would end up extinct. Within a few generations those genetics would have been more funky than royalty.

All solvable with proper engineering and technology. These vessels from the scant description we have were obviously advanced since they employed technology that we even don't have (no magic required).

Tobin wrote:... All solvable with proper engineering and technology. The vessels described were obviously advanced since they employed technology that we even don't have (no magic required).

How so? Would you mind going into engineering detail how this would be feasible given their resources and technology?

- Doc

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:

Tobin wrote:... All solvable with proper engineering and technology. The vessels described were obviously advanced since they employed technology that we even don't have (no magic required).

How so? Would you mind going into engineering detail how this would be feasible given their resources and technology?

- Doc

They were being taught how to build these vessels by beings that travel between star systems. I don't think it was much of a challenge for beings like that. It may have been a steep learning curve for the Jaredites, but I think that was the point. After all, these beings could have simply picked up the Jaredites and dropped them off in the Americas if they wanted to. They were teaching them to build these ships on purpose so the Jaredites would have the skills and knowledge to fashion their own civilization when they arrived in the Americas.

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:

Tobin wrote:... All solvable with proper engineering and technology. The vessels described were obviously advanced since they employed technology that we even don't have (no magic required).

How so? Would you mind going into engineering detail how this would be feasible given their resources and technology?

- Doc

Tobin's theory is a variation of the "ancient aliens" theory that crops up regularly on the History Channel. There's no answer for it because, like the "God did it" gambit, ancient aliens could have done things we can't explain, such as transporting elephants across an ocean without them starving to death.

Had I only known that the Jaredites were actually Atlanteans... I sure feel silly now.

Tobin wrote:You do realize the Jaredites could have brought the elephants with them.
....
We are talking about SEALED craft propelled by the waves with artificial light that could flip over and not dump the occupants on their heads with all their belongings and waste. If such craft were actually built, they were engineering marvels and I doubt carrying elephants is much of a stretch.
....
You do realize they had to feed themselves and had other animals with them as well. Clearly these craft had sufficient room for food and those animals (as well as all the equipment to keep them alive).
....
All solvable with proper engineering and technology. These vessels from the scant description we have were obviously advanced since they employed technology that we even don't have (no magic required).
....
They were being taught how to build these vessels by beings that travel between star systems. I don't think it was much of a challenge for beings like that. It may have been a steep learning curve for the Jaredites, but I think that was the point. After all, these beings could have simply picked up the Jaredites and dropped them off in the Americas if they wanted to. They were teaching them to build these ships on purpose so the Jaredites would have skills and knowledge to fashion their own civilization when they arrived in the Americas.

I know I shouldn't be surprised by it, but Tobin's arc in this thread has been fascinatingly bizarre. At every turn he proposes a solution that presents an even bigger problem to the original scenario. Yet, when confronted by that problem, he looks at it as an indication of his solution's plausibility. It's not a bug, it's a feature! Turtles all the way down.

I know, I know--don't feed the trolls and all that. I just can't help rubbernecking a bit, though.

Runtu wrote:Tobin's theory is a variation of the "ancient aliens" theory that crops up regularly on the History Channel. There's no answer for it because, like the "God did it" gambit, ancient aliens could have done things we can't explain, such as transporting elephants across an ocean without them starving to death.

We transport elephants across oceans today. You can't pretend it isn't possible with sufficient technology.

Now, if there are god-like beings (as the Book of Mormon claims), what is more likely? That they are magical creatures or an advanced species?