Is This The Year Of "Noah's Ark"?

The supposed ark that was found and shown of the discovery channel was not the not biblical ark........Too many factors discounted it. The real biblical ark if it is found, will probably be discovered on Mt. Ararat.......If so, it's discovery will indeed rearrange a skeptical mind.........

Atta Boy
 
Your continual abuse and misrepresentation of an otherwise very stylish form of punctuation is obsene, Norman. An elips is three dots separated by two spaces in the form; . . . or dot[space]dot[space]dot.

Also there is no evidence to back up claims that Noah's flood, his arc, nor Noah himself ever really existed, and even if they did, an ark could not have gotten 15,000 feet up onto a mountain under any circumstance. Give it up, you're a complete crackpot.
 
It really doesn't matter what you think or what I think..........Nor do I really care if you think the ark really exists or not.......However, as a skeptical inquirer that you obviously are, then you shouldn't even reading anything in this forum that concerns Noah's Ark.......It's way over your head!!! Also, I think you possibly spelled your forum name wrong.....It should be spelled and maybe even pronounced as: "Mistake" instead of......Better check it out for future posts.........

Atta Boy
 
Mystech said:
Your continual abuse and misrepresentation of an otherwise very stylish form of punctuation is obsene, Norman. An elips is three dots separated by two spaces in the form; . . . or dot[space]dot[space]dot.
*************
M*W: Thanks for bringing this up. I've had several comments that I haven't made yet about punctuation. I'm a member of American Medical Writers' Association, and I try to stay current on the new standards of grammar and punctuation. It is now more appropriate to use only one space following a sentence. I know this has been the standard for about 20 years now. By using only one space between sentences, it shortens the piece with fewer spaces as well as makes it more appealing to the eye.

Another thing I've noticed on sciforums is that people are using multiple returns between paragraphs. This also makes the post longer and it's just wasted space.

Spelling is another pet peeve I have. I can understand if someone whose native tongue is not English or even American (there is a difference) that their English usage may be somewhat broken, and I respect that person for at least trying to communicate the best way they can. However, there have been some gross spelling errors on some posts that appear to be sloppy because they can't type and just don't care. Your point would be more well taken if you at least edited your post and made corrections. There's no excuse for this sloppiness.

Another thing is that the members seem to be much younger than they were a year or so ago. It breaks my heart to see you youngsters get out of school and still can't read or write.

Above all else, if you use a computer--learn to type.

Medicine*Woman has spoken!
Click to expand...
 
iAye karamba! She does practice what she preaches, she just said she is a member of the AMWA, and her use of a double hyphen, whose proper name I don't even know because I was educated in a public high school, was poetry to my eyes!
 
Then she should be more interested in increasing her intellectual ability by writing more poetry.............Especially for you! In terms of "double hyphen", you can buy them at a local supermarket if you ask the store clerk.

Atta Boy
 
Norman said:
Well look at it like this Mr. SpyMoose, I think the possibility is very good that the ark that lays half buried at the 15,000 ft. level on Mt. Ararat, is probably the biblical ark of Noah........Who or what else could have made it, especially an ark that is over 7,000 years old and probably closer to 10,000 years.......As for the "Great Flood"??? Something had to place it up there.........I don't think Noah would have been able to haul it up there even with a team of 100 mules......So maybe the "Great Flood" theory best explains it don't you think??? It's my opinion that the biblical ark will be discovered on Mt. Ararat, hopefully this year or next. If so, then all of the bible skeptics and disbelievers will then be hard pressed to explain it, won't they.......

Atta Boy :)
Click to expand...

Hiya Norman,

How have you arrived at the 7000 - 10,000 year figure for the dating of the Ark?

The genealogies in the Bible seem to state that the earth is around 5764 years old, so the time of the flood would have been much less then 7000 years ago.

Dave
 
davewhite04 said:
Hiya Norman,

How have you arrived at the 7000 - 10,000 year figure for the dating of the Ark?

The genealogies in the Bible seem to state that the earth is around 5764 years old, so the time of the flood would have been much less then 7000 years ago.

Dave
Click to expand...

I'm not going to argue the numbers right now...........If they find the ark on Mt. Ararat and it's petrified wood, then the numbers become important..........

Atta Boy :)
 
People who argue for noah's ark also seem to forget the monumental loss of life that would've occurred in the in sea. If the whole world flooded enough to get a boat up to the top of Mt Ararat, the sea's salt content would've gone crazy, resulting in the mass extinction of many forms of underwater life. The sea would've been largely empty by the time the waters receded.

Another thing to ask is where did all this water come from?? There is not enough water on this planet to submerge all land masses or most land masses. Unless this water magically appeared out of nowhere noah's ark is firmly debunked.

Unless noah catered for fish on his boat as well as having a machine that generated water from nothing, I feel safe in saying the noah's ark story to be nothing more than a story. Norman, logistically, sensibly, by any stretch of the imagination no-one can justify noah's ark the story. Heck, it would take years to re populate the world from just noah and his family and then you have inbreeding issues.

No. noah's ark is not possible. I feel sorry for the sod who believes in it.
 
Well to answer your question in a logical way, I would say just keep an open mind about it and let future expeditions that climb Mt. Ararat discover what they're going to discover and "if" they discover a big wooden (Golpher wood that's petrified or otherwise) 450 foot long ark at the 15,500 ft. level.......What are "U" going to say next???

Atta Boy
 
I think extra punctuation really helps make the point, don't you? This has gone beyond merely awful, what was up with the capitol u in quotation marks last post? The lord ought to make a flood that can wash net speak out of the world.
 
The so-called ark found in 1959 by a NATO mapping mission conducted by the Turkish Air Force turned out to be a clay upthrust in lava field. No artifacts were recovered in the summer of 1960 when an expedition went to the site photographed.

In 1984, a christian fanatic and hoaxer (he has other "biblical" hoaxes to his credit) Ron Wyatt succeeded in creating a stir and renewed the discovery as if the expedition never occurred. Wyatt claimed (I think he's dead now) to have found many artifacts that are without provenience such as the stone anchors of the ark, Noah's house, and the burial place of Noah, which Wyatt said he found through the use of prayer and reflection rather than test pits and trenches.

There have also been other Noah's ark hoaxes, such as the George Jammal hoax. Jammal claimed to have visited the ark and to have a piece of wood from the ship. His hoax led to the documentary "The Incredible Discovery of Noah's Ark," which aired 2/20/93 on CBS in the United States. This hoax was well covered by Lippard (1994).

Sources:

Crouse, Bill (1988). Ron Wyatt: Are His Claims Bonafide? Ararat Report. 17, May-June 1988. Found on the internet on 5/17/04 at http://noahsarksearch.com/ronwyatt.htm

Lippard, Jim (1994). Sun goes down in flames: the Jammal ark hoax. Skeptic, vol 2, no. 3, 1994, pp. 22-33. Found on the internet on 5/17/04 at http://www.skeptic.com/02.3.lippard-ark-hoax.html
 
It's obvious of course the search is still on for Noah's Ark........Nobody denies that. If the ark still exists, then it's highly possible it's on Mt. Ararat somewhere.........For the believers, it's there....For the nonbelievers???

Atta Boy
 
Norman said:
For the believers, it's there....For the nonbelievers???
Click to expand...

Its either there or it isn't. Whether one is a believer or not is irrelevant.

If, indeed a boat exists, it could just as easily be the boat of Utnapishtim. But, based on the hoaxes perpetrated by those in the past and the fact that early biblical mythology is based largely on Near Eastern texts of older age, I no more expect that anyone will locate "Noah's ark" any more than I'd expect archaeologists to uncover Santa's sleigh in Northern Canada.

Norman said:
I guess you probably don't read much biblical literature or acheological news these days do you? If you don't, then the joke's on you
Click to expand...
I read a fair amount of archaeological news. No real archaeologists appear to be interested in any recent "ark" interests. Perhaps you could cite a bit of recent news for us. And as I said, the 1950's aerial photo turned out to be a geologic feature.
 
Last edited:
There are no "recent" ark discoveries.......It was a 1949 ariel photograph taken by a U.S. Navy aircraft and the object in question that was phtotgraphed was called the "Ararat Anomoly" and that's all there was to it..........The search is still on and that's all there is to the story at this point.

Atta Boy
 
Norman said:
There are no "recent" ark discoveries.......It was a 1949 ariel photograph taken by a U.S. Navy aircraft and the object in question that was phtotgraphed was called the "Ararat Anomoly" and that's all there was to it..........The search is still on and that's all there is to the story at this point.

Atta Boy
Click to expand...

Either way, you didn't read anything I wrote. The photo wasn't from 1949, it was 1959 and it wasn't a U.S. Navy aircraft, it was a Turkish Air Force pilot.

The photo revealed a "boat-shaped" object on the ground at Mt. Ararat. This object turned out to be a geologic feature by a 1960 expedition.

They already went.

It ain't there.
 
SkinWalker said:
Either way, you didn't read anything I wrote. The photo wasn't from 1949, it was 1959 and it wasn't a U.S. Navy aircraft, it was a Turkish Air Force pilot.

The photo revealed a "boat-shaped" object on the ground at Mt. Ararat. This object turned out to be a geologic feature by a 1960 expedition.

They already went.

It ain't there.
*************
M*W: There was a book published some time ago, early 70s I think. I've seen nothing published since then, but that doesn't mean that nothing's been published. My question is: Why does it have to be Noah's Ark that will be discovered? Maybe it will be the Ark of the Covenant or the Virgin Mary's remains. Maybe it will be Jesus' bones. Personally, I'd like to know what remains lie below the Chartres Cathredral instead of what's on top of Mt. Ararat.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top