Noah's Ark -- Fact or Forgery?

[Woody]

Noah's Ark Web-Page

Welcome to Noah's Ark National Park.

Check out this Video, it's quite impressive:

Short Video Movie of Science Team's Investigation

Longer Video of Details

The Park really exists, but what is this supposed ark structure? Is it a geological oddity formed by a lava flow that just happens to match the 300 Egyptian cubit description in Genesis? This structure was recently revealed by an earthquake.

What about the relics -- are they forgeries? I could possibly believe the iron studs, but what about the aluminum work? Are these pictures actually forgeries cooked up by a man of questionable reputation? What about the others on the team and the alignment of the supposed "anchor stones" with the ark?

How about the laminated petrified wood? Can lava cause wood to petrify?

These are the vertical ribs on the side of the formation.

 

[Woody]

More Nice Pics. Kinda quiet around here.

Supposedly 300 Egyptian Cubits in length -- what is it?

Documentation

The royal Egyptian cubit was 20.62 inches. Now, if we consider the Biblical statement that Moses was "learned in all the wisdom of Egypt" - Acts 7:22, as the author of Genesis, he would have been referring to the only cubit he knew. 300 cubits = 515.5 feet. 50 cubits = 85.9 feet. The measurement of the length of the boat, taken in August, 1985 by Maylon Wilson and Baumgardner of Los Alamos Laboratory with sophisticated measurement devices, showed the inside length of the boat to be 515.7 feet! David Fasold's measurement of the same was exactly 515 feet!

How about these claims:

2. Twelve years of electronic and mechanical probing has positively identified it as a boat.

3. Repeated chemical analysis of many different samples, taken at different times by different people and analyzed at different laboratories, positively prove it to be composed of very ancient wood and metal.

4. Samples of petrified wood have been located and taken from the structure in the presence of many witnesses. In addition to previous tests, I have additional samples which have metal brackets and rust, which were videoed as they were retrieved from the boat. I will have them tested at various testing facilities in the future and in the presence of witnesses.

5. A large number of ancient and medieval inscriptions near the site positively identify it as Noah's Ark. There will be more on these inscriptions in our later book, which will include photographs.

6. Its 515 foot length, its 138 foot width (splayed) are the measurements of Noah's Ark as recorded by Moses (educated to use the ancient Egyptian cubit) in the Book of Genesis. See an explanation under "Questions I Am Most Frequently Asked About Noah's Ark".

7. It is located in the mountains of Urartu (Ararat) as specified in the Bible.

8. Its location at an elevation of 6300 feet above sea level is above any possible height reachable by a "local flood" but is below the maximum water level that would result from all the water of our planet washing the earth's surface (7000-8000 feet).

9. Its location, many miles from any present or ancient body of water that would support it, defies any other explanation.

10. Its massive size and weight make it impossible that it could have been "trundled" (dragged) this distance from water, and its altitude above present and past sea levels defies any other explanation.

11. Contrary to a touched up photograph, which has been widely circulated, it's the only formation of its kind on planet earth, other than remains of other ancient boats of much smaller size.

12. Your writer, in the presence of Turkish authorities and other observers, performed an electronic survey of a site that some of our critics said resembled the boat formation (the similarities were vague at best, nonexistent in actuality); the metal detectors and sub-surface radar scans showed nothing in the site that were not present anywhere in the area.

13. A careful electronic survey of the area around the formation showed none of the structures present in the formation.

14. Chemical analysis of the area around the formation showed only normal traces of the metallic oxides and organic carbon which are present in large amounts in the formation.

15. Train-loads of petrified wood are present in the formation, but there is little to be found in the rest of eastern Turkey.

16. Many ancient historians record that the remains of Noah's Ark were to be visited in this area.

6) What do the scientists and other experts you have taken to the "boat" say; do they believe it is the Ark?

Answer: One who is totally convinced is David Fasold. David has written a book entitled "The Ark of Noah" which details much of our research, and while we disagree on some matters I don't feel are significant or cause for doubt as to the identity of the boat, I highly recommend it. He is meticulously thorough in his research and recording of the data. I must give David a great deal of credit in the research and wish to add he was the most enjoyable person I have ever worked with. He knew the first time he laid eyes on it that it was a boat. And he's an expert in shipwrecks.

It could be a fraud.

The main claims at a glance
Turkish Government says it’s a boat……FALSE
There is a regular metallic pattern……FALSE
Lab tests show petrified laminated wood……FALSE
Turkish scientists found metal rods……FALSE
Metal artifacts have been proved by lab……FALSE
There are ‘ship’s ribs’ showing……FALSE
There is lots of petrified wood……FALSE
Radar shows man-made (boat) structure……FALSE
Why do we mention these articles on our Web site again? Gray’s advertising insert Discovery Times has appeared in major secular newspapers in Australia and may appear in other newspapers, increasing the likelihood that Christians will be asked questions about these claims.

What do you think -- gimmickry or science?

Somew say he (Ron Wyatt) was a complete fraud

 

[usp8riot]

Interesting, but none the less, I believe it's a gimmick.

 

[Mythbuster]

A crater, and all they found is a damn wood.
A damn wood without digging
Without digging deep. :m:

Chance is very high that some dude put it there.

 

[James R]

I say, let the scientists do their job.

Do you believe this is Noah's ark, Woody?

 

[Mythbuster]

Let's also not forget the incomprehensible amount of rain that fell over that comical 40 day period...

40 days = 960 hours

Mt. Everest = 29,035 ft

+20 bonus feet (Genesis 7:19)

Divide 29,055 feet by 960 hours...

That's equal to 30.26 feet of rain per hour which also translates to 6.052 inches of rain per minute. Trust me, there was NOBODY pounding on the outside of that ship trying to get in. Why? They were hydraulically pinned to the ground. That's like standing underneath a waterfall that surrounds the entire circumference of the planet.

Let's pretend that Mt. Ararat was the only mountain around and plug our numbers back into it:

40 days = 960 hours

Mt. Ararat = 16,945 ft

+20 bonus feet (Genesis 7:19)

Divide 16,965 feet by 960 hours...

This is now equal to 17.67 inches of rain per hour and 3.5 inches of rain per minute. This is still enough to strip all organic matter from on top of any layer of bedrock.

See? Creationists deserve to be laughed at...

 

[Woody]

Let's also not forget the incomprehensible amount of rain that fell over that comical 40 day period...

40 days = 960 hours

Mt. Everest = 29,035 ft

+20 bonus feet (Genesis 7:19)

Divide 29,055 feet by 960 hours...

That's equal to 30.26 feet of rain per hour which also translates to 6.052 inches of rain per minute. Trust me, there was NOBODY pounding on the outside of that ship trying to get in. Why? They were hydraulically pinned to the ground. That's like standing underneath a waterfall that surrounds the entire circumference of the planet.

Let's pretend that Mt. Ararat was the only mountain around and plug our numbers back into it:

40 days = 960 hours

Mt. Ararat = 16,945 ft

+20 bonus feet (Genesis 7:19)

Divide 16,965 feet by 960 hours...

This is now equal to 17.67 inches of rain per hour and 3.5 inches of rain per minute. This is still enough to strip all organic matter from on top of any layer of bedrock.

See? Creationists deserve to be laughed at...

The argument that goes with the flood is that Mt. Everest was not 29K feet in elevation at the time of the flood. Also fossil material can be found on Mt. Everest.

As said before, the majority of the water is proposed to come from the fountains of the deep. Less than 5% of the earth's water is at its surface. Were you aware of that? Perhaps you are too busy laughing to care about this fact.

 

[Woody]

I say, let the scientists do their job.

Do you believe this is Noah's ark, Woody?

Probably not Noah's ark.

God doesn't use people with questionable reputation to be his witness -- unfortunately Ron Wyatt falls in this category. I think he had good intentions, but when you look at all his other wild claims involving the ark of the covenant, blood of Christ, etc. it fits a pattern of deception.

You notice that Ron Wyatt is the only one making the claims, and an archaeological find of this importance shouldn't be touched by an amateur. I've been to an archeological excavation. Nothing ticks them (archaeologists)off worse than treasure hunters and the like coming in and disturbing the site.

Ther are plenty of trustworthy archaeologists that would be willing to do this site. I watched in horror as Ron and his taxi driver scraped away the rib timbers.

In summary-- it's probably a creationist's equivalent of piltdown man.

 

[Sock puppet path]

Earthflow

 

[SkinWalker]

Its good that woody appears to agree that Wyatt was a con artist and woody has already provided a link to the TentMaker website, but here are some specific links that those that might be interested can check.

I provide them because sciforums topics are so easily googled and the gullible tend to find their way here. Its good that the info is available.

The site is a geologic feature called a syncline. http://www.csun.edu/~vcgeo005/bogus.html

More detailed page of the one Woody already linked to that disputes the late Ron Wyatt's claims: http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v14/i4/report.asp

the rocks in this formation were once molten, cooling to become an "ophiolite belt," meaning the Durupinar site contains rocks and dirt that have been altered due to the molten process.2 It is this phenomenon that has elevated the carbon percentage of the Durupinar site's soil. This same chemical process is also responsible for deceiving Wyatt into believing he has found "metal brackets and rust." According to Morris the site has many manganese nodules which are high in iron, which by the unknowing could be mistaken for iron.3

Previous explorers of the site concluded that since the Durupinar site did not contain wood, petrified or otherwise, it must be only an unusual natural rock formation. Wyatt, on the other hand, claims that the Durupinar site contains "train-loads" of petrified wood (p. 13, no. 5). The problem, according to Wyatt, is that the "petrified wood" of the Durupinar site is different from any other petrified wood. It has no growth rings.

-- http://www.tentmaker.org/WAR/HasNoahsArkBeenFound2.html (I couldn't resist the emphasis on "ophiolite").

http://www.tentmaker.org/WAR/BaumgardnerLetter.html

Ron Wyatt: just another asshole who was trying to make a buck and get his 15 minutes. The Ron Wyatt Archaeological Research website is still taking donations! http://www.tentmaker.org/WAR/index.html

A Great Christian Scam - A christian speaking out against the obvious con-job that Wyatt perpetrated and others are continuing use as they defraud the gullible. Favorite quote from that site:

Perhaps more incredible to me than the fact this con could go on as long as it has, is the response of many Christian leaders to this perpetration. I think the most honest response I got in this whole investigation came from a non-believer from a television studio. He said, "I became involved for the money." Thank you, non-Christian for a little honesty.

 

[Avatar]

Fact or Forgery

Neither, it's mythology
which is written in the language of poetry not prose.
Religious christian folk bang their heads against a metaphor thinking it to be fact.

 

[Laika]

I love this quote from the arkdiscovery.com site:

Contains high-tech metal alloy fittings, as proven by separate lab analyses paid for by Ron Wyatt, then later Kevin Fisher of this web site. Aluminum was found in the fittings which is a MAN-MADE metal!

I wonder how Noah refined the aluminium ore. Electrolysis?

 

[spuriousmonkey]

The argument that goes with the flood is that Mt. Everest was not 29K feet in elevation at the time of the flood. Also fossil material can be found on Mt. Everest.

Mount Everest, like the rest of the Himalayas, rose from the floor of the ancient Tethys Sea. The range was created when the Eurasian continental plate collided with the Indian subcontinental plate about 30 to 50 million years ago. Eventually the marine limestone was forced upward to become the characteristic yellow band on the top of Mount Everest. Beneath the shallow marine rock lies the highly metamorphosed black gneiss (foliated, or layered, rock) of Precambrian time, a remnant of the original continental plates that collided and forced up the Himalayas.

The sea didn't rise, the mountain did. Not because god wished for it, but because two tectonic plates collided and pushed the himalayas upwards towards the blue sky. No, god didn't make the sky blue.

You seem to think woody that if we disprove one aspect of the Noah story you can happily move on to the next one. NO... woody...NO. If one aspect is impossible the whole story is impossible. Logic... woody...Logic...it is your best friend.

 

[SkinWalker]

Since this is pseudo-archaeology, I propose that the topic be moved to the Pseudoscience sub-forum where it can be properly addressed.

 

[Woody]

Neither, it's mythology
which is written in the language of poetry not prose.
Religious christian folk bang their heads against a metaphor thinking it to be fact.

You missed it.

 

[Woody]

Spurious said,

You seem to think woody that if we disprove one aspect of the Noah story you can happily move on to the next one. NO... woody...NO. If one aspect is impossible the whole story is impossible. Logic... woody...Logic...it is your best friend.

As I said before, if I can believe the supernatural, then the impossible becomes possible. How about christ being resurrected from the dead?

 

[Woody]

Since this is pseudo-archaeology, I propose that the topic be moved to the Pseudoscience sub-forum where it can be properly addressed.

whatever, I don't really care where it goes -- religion forum or otherwise.

 

[c7ityi_]

The sea didn't rise, the mountain did. Not because god wished for it, but because two tectonic plates collided and pushed the himalayas upwards towards the blue sky.

Why did they collide? Why did they move in the first place, what causes them to move? Also, they couldn't collide without the magnetic energy within matter, so what causes that energy?

In the end, when you dive deep enough, you'll realize that "god did it".

 

[KennyJC]

How about christ being resurrected from the dead?

That is like saying "How does the cyborg in Terminator 2 change shape?"... BECAUSE ITS FICTION.

 

[spidergoat]

I think people just don't want to give up the idea of God, even if empirical investigation reveals that there is nothing for Him to do.