Noah's Ark found?

Recommended Posts

Some assumed that the biblical Noah's Ark was just a story but evidence may prove otherwise

it appears that back in the late 1980s scientis found wood timbers and rivots on a site in the mountains of Ararat. The boat itseld is said to be mainly buried dunderground but radar scans reveal a "man made" wood structure that eqauls the demesions of Noah's Ark in the Bible. Ancient pottery was with a bird and fish with the name Noah on it was found there as well. The Turkish government has a visitors center at the site. I guess the world hasnt realized that Noah's Ark has already been found

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

i've seen a lot of this before, but i think a lot of it has been proven otherwise. i'm also pretty sure that geologists have proven that there was never a great flood. it'll take some digging through google to find the links though.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

the man made wood anomoly that was found in these mountains of Ararat were exactly 515 feet long...thats exactly how long Moses decribed Noah's Ark was and the Bible says it rested in the mountains of Ararat. basically you can see the impression in the ground and its shaped exactly like a boat. wood cage construction was found on the side which indeed indicated it is a boat. We also know a worldwide flood occured becasue scientist are finding sea water fish fossils in mountains all over the world. look at the video links on the website I provied...I think its about two hours long but the evidence is compelling.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

read through this. the evidence you're citing is over 20 years ago. we have learned more in those 20 years. but regardless of that, this makes a really good read with scientific suggestions as to why that is not the ark.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

One program I saw stated that the flood could have been the Black Sea emptying into the Mediterranian and the story of it evolved since it was orally told for generations and Gilgamesh's flood could have inspired Noah's. Plus I believe they mentioned several possible Noah's arks.

As for fossils on mountians, plate techtonics would have a hand in that. Almost everywhere at some point was under water. Geologic forces uplifted portions of former sea or ocean floors.

I'm not saying the story wasn't true, but I do doubt the world was destroyed. The world to Biblical people was very small.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

One program I saw stated that the flood could have been the Black Sea emptying into the Mediterranian and the story of it evolved since it was orally told for generations and Gilgamesh's flood could have inspired Noah's. Plus I believe they mentioned several possible Noah's arks.

As for fossils on mountians, plate techtonics would have a hand in that. Almost everywhere at some point was under water. Geologic forces uplifted portions of former sea or ocean floors.

I'm not saying the story wasn't true, but I do doubt the world was destroyed. The world to Biblical people was very small.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

another possible explanation is that continental drift and subduction / reemergence / tilt / uplift of the earth's crust has moved various pieces of land in different directions, and that formerly low & horizontally bedded lakebed or ocean floor (with its organic deposits locked underneath successive layers of sedimentary strata) has been uplifted as the various plates collide or separate.

in this scenario, it would more likely be lakebed instead of ocean floor, since heavier ocean floor rock tends to go down into the mantle when plates collide, whereas lakebottoms or seas, since they are essentially surface features of much lighter continental crust, tend to go up. even so, there is evidence of ocean floor rock that, having been only partially subducted into the mantle, remained intact (preserving its fossilized structures - your 'fish'), and then quickly rose to the top of a tectonic plate collision before it had time to sink deep enough to metamorphose - thereby depositing ocean floor rock and its fossils on the earth's surface. if this kind of uplift were a part of an ongoing plate collision, it would eventually end up as part of a mountain. that's orogeny.

that said, sure, why not find a boat that matches the (much-debated) 'cubit' dimensions described in genesis? many secular people do not discount antique religious documents as completely ahistorical, even if they frown upon the mythic and miraculous aspects. many things in the bible that can be verified by archaeological discovery (to date) have been demonstrated to be accurate. whoo hoo. many aspects of greek myth can be tied to real places and artifacts, but the account of the location of the gods' abode (olympus) is apocryphal. they're historical documents; not an indelible memory you have of it actually happening - nor are they facsimile copies of what actually happened (or maybe they are, but how would we ever know?)

it's just text on a damn page - the part where you decide to interpret it as fact is just that - your head tweaking what you read. heads don't all tweak the same, and plenty of people find religious accounts of floods, towers, creation, ribs, etc. ludicrous...not that they have any answers either. i kinda think all the mythic stories - as well as the scientific explanations - make sense.

nothing you believe as a spiritual person can be proved by externals; nothing physical that has been or will be discovered - no artifact, no matter how amazingly consistent with ancient accounts - is a valid confirmation of the existence of the object of your faith (i.e., your god, your particular doctrinal story, etc.) i find proof to be a poor foundation on which to construct my metaphysical beliefs. i have my mind, and it is the sole epistemological filter for everything i accept as fact, as well as every conclusion i reach. the intellect and the emotional life that spurs my longing for answers are the building blocks of my beliefs...what i observe in the material world only informs my version of those beliefs - no one else's (and how would i know if it did?)

discovery of old boats that contain pristine specimens of the bones of every animal pair (and the groups of sevens), with the names of each animal tattooed in english on the femur, with a fossilized olive branch still on deck, and shem, ham & japheth's dead bodies (also labeled in english) camped out beside the boat - all of it pretty much would only mean that the bible nailed the part of the story that we've discovered. there's a boat on a mountain - that's it. it tells us nothing of floods, their dating, duration and scale. and it sure as hell neither proves nor disproves the presence of the judaic god. if the judaic god exists, that ain't the way to seek him out.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

read through this. the evidence you're citing is over 20 years ago. we have learned more in those 20 years. but regardless of that, this makes a really good read with scientific suggestions as to why that is not the ark.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

that seems less like a scholary journal entry and more of a thesis protesting this man's "findings" Seventh-Day Adventists already protest the understanding of biblical prophecy. To me this article seems more reaffirming the wrong understandings and readings of faith and "being spoken to" by God than anything concrete.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I think both lack any real evidence and maybe the fact that they are both bias has something to do that. Scientific statistics can always be questioned. One example is I am sure there are "scientific" findings for both global warming and against its exsistance. It is hard to really believe anything unless they look at both sides and how they can exsist and why one can override the other.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

i can argue that the side in favor of the ark was argued by wyatt and the side against it by the article i linked. again, this article was not meant to be written from a very scientific point of view, but puts the science into layman's terms (which i prefer, not being a geologist or archaeologist, which the guy who wrote that article was studying). if you would like, i'll dig up a link that uses all sorts of scientific language.

i did not detect any bias in it other than that he did not feel that the ark discovery was legit. i've seen other articles that also refute the "evidence" from wyatt. my religion, or lack thereof, has nothing to do with me being biased against the ark. i just tend to believe science when presented with scientific evidence. the only thing religion was ever really meant to do was fill in the gaps where science left off. science is slowly filling in those gaps.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I guess we can agree to disagree, because I am fairly religious, I tend to look at it as more faith driven rather than looking at the scientific evidence and refutting most, especially since I do believe in religion and many stories from the bible.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

well, the thing is, you can't just go and say that science is wrong, when something is widely accepted as being true. wyatt's ark is not widely accepted as being noah's ark, and scientific studies have proven that. when i have some time, i'll go digging for links. many stories from the bible are just that... stories. while some of the historical aspects of it are based on truth, much of it is just stories to teach morals.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

sometimes it is good to a take a story and get the meaning out of it. Even if this is not true, for many christians I am sure it puts a little something into their head to reaffirm their faith. It is not bad to believe, while it may not be Noahs Ark it is still good to see the positive and that it may as I said above reaffirm their faith and beliefs.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I saw a show on the discovery channel a few years back on this. What always killed it for me was the metal fittings (desribed on the show as iron nails, not high tech alloy fittings of titanium and aluminum), that came before ironworking. Sure, the dates may be off, but ships were built with pegs.

I think there have been many great floods, although they were regional, and legends came out of them. I used to drive my Sunday School teachers nuts when I questioned the stories in the Bibkle for scientific or historical innaccuracies. I'm Christian, but I don't believe the Bible should be interpreted literally by any stretch of the imagination.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I saw a show on the discovery channel a few years back on this. What always killed it for me was the metal fittings (desribed on the show as iron nails, not high tech alloy fittings of titanium and aluminum), that came before ironworking. Sure, the dates may be off, but ships were built with pegs.

I think there have been many great floods, although they were regional, and legends came out of them. I used to drive my Sunday School teachers nuts when I questioned the stories in the Bibkle for scientific or historical innaccuracies. I'm Christian, but I don't believe the Bible should be interpreted literally by any stretch of the imagination.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

for example maybe the site is Noah's Ark but biblical calculation may be off. Scientist have used other decayed boats as examples and found that the Noah's Ark site looks just look other cases where known boats deteriated.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The nature of the Christian religion is that you have to believe this boat existed or it puts into question the belief of the religion in the first place. This is the nature of most religions on this planet, that is they are full of fables and myths that won't stand up to any kind of scientific analysis even though the science is proven and can be easily demonstrated and the fables and myths only have "faith" behind them. Faith = belief without any proof.

If one takes the word of the bible as written we are to believe that 40 days of rain flooded the entire planet including covering all mountains on the planet to a depth of 20 feet. On top of that an old man and his sons built a boat that housed a pair of every animal in existence that would have otherwise drowned. We are also to believe that every other human on the planet was unable to survive this flood and we are all directly descended from Noah and his family as are all animals from this flood.

It doesn't take much science to figure out this volume of water doesn't exist on this planet, not even close. Furthermore, genetically it doesn't make any sense either since, if you take this at face value, these events happened less than 5000 year ago. Then there is the small thing about the worship of a God that is so vengeful, that he would condemn every human on the planet to a horrible death by drowning and presumably a trip to live out eternity in the sulphur fires of hell, simply because he did not like the way they were behaving. This isn't a God that I would want to follow.

This find is not noah's ark because it only existed in the minds of men.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The point of putting so many "mean" God stories into the bible is to show that when Jesus came he corrected the wrong's and made the faith based on believe and faith. That if you believe and understand you will be rejoiced. Many books never make the bible both good and bad.

my point is that while it may be a story, people even bringing it up may help people reaffirm their faith. You can see the lady of guadalupe never happened but it helped people still believe. What is wrong with believing in something? You believe the Yankees will be saved when roger returns, just because it is proven that wont happen doesn't mean it can't help you believe.