JUST read that the owners of the replica of Noah’s Ark in Kentucky are suing their insurance company for…wait for it…FLOOD DAMAGE.

Well, replica as opposed to the real thing. Also, the real thing didn’t need to last a long time (less than half a year)…

It’s not for the Replica, it’s for rebuilding a road that collapsed.


…and your point is…?

My impression (and I think his) was that you were talking about the seaworthiness of the replica ark itself, rather than coincidence of it involving a flood.

Not at all. I was commenting on the irony of the owners of the replica ark suing an insurance company for “flood damages.”