'Noah's Ark' remains discovered 12,000ft up a

[voiceofreason]

"So if there was a boat at 12000 feet (and im not saying that there is with any certainty) what would be a plausable reason? "

The hitch broke and it rolled away?

Really,really,really,really,really,really,really,really early viking burial.

[DurgaMata]

Taken from Wikipedia: "Then the flood swept over."

Excavations in Iraq have revealed evidence of localized flooding at Shuruppak (modern Tell Fara, Iraq) and various other Sumerian cities. A layer of riverine sediments, radiocarbon dated to ca. 2900 BCE, interrupts the continuity of settlement, extending as far north as the city of Kish. Polychrome pottery from the Jemdet Nasr period (3000-2900 BCE) was discovered immediately below the Shuruppak flood stratum.[10] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumerian_king_list

I remember seeing some massive stone anchors in some photos on here, I think it was Turkey. They do tourist visits there to see them. It's not a massive stretch of the imagination to think some guy built a massive boat in preparation for a flood.

[+HerNibs]

Ron Wyatt declared the stones with holes were anchors.

Wyatt Archaeology

No archaeologist seem to agree with him.

Even Answers In Genisis thinks he's full of it.

I'll look for what the real archaeologist think they are.

Nibs

[IronGhost]

Are they really claiming the squarish figure in one of the pictures is a hay bale? The hay baler was invented until 1850-something, and hay bales did not come into general use for many years later, like the 1930s, I think.

It would be extremely unlikely that they made square bales in those days, even if they fashioned them by hand.

I notice that in that same picture they helpfully place some fresh straw in the scene -- I'm sorry, and don't mean to offend anyone, but this not only screams of a set-up and a fake, but not even a very clever one.

[psyche101]

I do hope leading scientists do get a chance to have a look. If it really is a boat, and it really is 12,000 feet up, I feel we have to have a second look at the Biblical account. Tales of Gilgamesh and so forth, yes, but if this really is a boat that fits the dimensions of those that are in the Bible, and scientists (real ones) manage to date the structure in the time frame,m well.... if the shoe fits, we need to have a second look. One must remember man actually wrote down the Bible, and it haas been interpreted many ways, perhaps we have just been reading it all wrong.

I think it would be the only way to put the ideal to rest. I guess we just have to see if the Christian Fundamentalists allow access. If not, well, I think we have our answer, they can bleat that they have the Ark until they are blue in the face, but until proof is brought forth, anyone who is not a devout fundie will call them a liar. After all, this is like the fourth Ark found so far isn't it? I think the Vatican should be approached to ask their view, and ask the Pope for access. Surely any Christian would not deny a direct order from the Pope to allow access to a limited group of scientists?

There is much more proof than the atmospheric conditions, civilizations would not be found that have been found, and then there is the large question of freshwater organisms. Far too many to have evolved in the last 2,000 years, and fossil record gives us freshwater organisms that predate the flood - which all would have died when sea levels rose. It is pointless describing such hard facts to a story that incorporates miracles. EG God sorted all that out for us.

I think the best approach is to give the benefit of the doubt, and at the same time take the Bull by the horns. If you have Noah's Ark, that is dead set terrific, we just created ourselves a crap-load to re-write and understand. Show us the money. When can we send up some real scientists to help you all? If the response is a silence, tell the world, these charlatans say they have Noahs ark, but as far as we can determine, they are lying through their teeth. Put them in the spotlight they have created for themselves.

[Paracelse]

I have this lovely piece of wood from the ark of the covenant. Now I'm sure you won't want evidence of it's authenticity, you'll just believe and send me 2,999 for the item plus shipping and handling. Belief is what every conman relies on when they make a sale.

Is it gold covered and would it power my house with electricity for the rest of my life???? :P in which case I would buy ... it's cheaper than solar panels on my roof

[Paracelse]

I feel sorry for you because you don't believe. You're not looking hard enough for the evidence of God. God Bless You.

Every time I look around, I find evidence to the contrary... sorry

[Watchers]

Maybe I missed the memo, but why is it so outrageous that there's still straw in the compartment? After all, these chambers were preserved in freezing temperatures on the top of an icy mountain. Is it that far fetched to think that whatever lay within them would be preserved too? If the chambers were sealed and there was no oxygen, and it was too cold for any bacteria/organisms, and it was untouched by humans, what would there be to remove the hay? We find fully preserved Woolly Mammoths with the fur still in tact on them.

[Dracunum3010]

A video of the expedition team consisting of Chinese and Turkish team inside the ark.

My link

Translations

Chinese Man: I'm coming down! (0:30)

Chinese Man: Both side of the walls is also made from wood. Is the bottom made from wood? (0:35)

Chinese Man 2: Even the sides are made from wood.

Chinese lady: (Exasperating breath) I'm currently standing inside the Noah's Ark. From what I see is here is a stairs made from wood. Can you hear? (hitting wood) this is the sound of wood. If you all look up, there is a piece of wood around 2-3 meters long.

[Professor Buzzkill]

A video of the expedition team consisting of Chinese and Turkish team inside the ark.

My link

Translations

Chinese Man: I'm coming down! (0:30)

Chinese Man: Both side of the walls is also made from wood. Is the bottom made from wood? (0:35)

Chinese Man 2: Even the sides are made from wood.

Chinese lady: (Exasperating breath) I'm currently standing inside the Noah's Ark. From what I see is here is a stairs made from wood. Can you hear? (hitting wood) this is the sound of wood. If you all look up, there is a piece of wood around 2-3 meters long.

Its hard to tell but from that video it appears to be a wooden structure burried under solid ice. It would be interesting to know how old the ice is, or if there is an actual carbon dating of that wood.

All i can say that it must be a very well planned hoax, and i doubt it is a mine shaft as others have claimed. Mining at the top of a mountain under ice is almost as ridiculous as finding a boat at the top of a mountain

[danielost]

The mountains of arafat are not the same as mt. arafat i recently learned. they're not even in the same country or reagon.

[Abramelin]

The mountains of arafat are not the same as mt. arafat i recently learned. they're not even in the same country or reagon.

I think your mountains are located somewhere on the Westbank or the Gaza Strip.

[danielost]

I think your mountains are located somewhere on the Westbank or the Gaza Strip.

maybe or in iran.

[GeistOnerz]

straw still in one of the holds

flood waters near 10, 000ft

flood story told over and over again in diff religions and cultures

fact that they found the same dayum "ark" again and again

i say fake. as fake as pam andersons tits

[Watchers]

straw still in one of the holds

flood waters near 10, 000ft

flood story told over and over again in diff religions and cultures

fact that they found the same dayum "ark" again and again

i say fake. as fake as pam andersons tits

Again with the damn straw issue! You people need to go back and read THIS post of mine:

Maybe I missed the memo, but why is it so outrageous that there's still straw in the compartment? After all, these chambers were preserved in freezing temperatures on the top of an icy mountain. Is it that far fetched to think that whatever lay within them would be preserved too? If the chambers were sealed and there was no oxygen, and it was too cold for any bacteria/organisms, and it was untouched by humans, what would there be to remove the hay? We find fully preserved Woolly Mammoths with the fur still in tact on them.

[voiceofreason]

Again with the damn straw issue! You people need to go back and read THIS post of mine:

Straw aside, there are too many inconsistancies in this article for it to be taken seriously.

[Abramelin]

maybe or in iran.

I was just kidding Daniel.

But I guess you confused 2 names: Mt AraRat and Mt AraFat. Mt Arafat is where Muslim pilgrims go to when they are in Saudi Arabia during trhe hadj.

Maybe they will name one after Yasser Arafat??

[GeistOnerz]

Straw aside, there are too many inconsistancies in this article for it to be taken seriously.

truth

[Watchers]

Straw aside, there are too many inconsistancies in this article for it to be taken seriously.

Like what?

The fact that they haven't disclosed its location seems like common sense to me. If I discovered something like that, until it got PROCLAIMED an archaeological dig-site by the local government, I wouldn't tell anyone where it was. That's exactly what this group is doing.

And if you watch the video--it looks pretty convincing to me. What issues do you have with it?

[voiceofreason]

Like what?

The fact that they haven't disclosed its location seems like common sense to me. If I discovered something like that, until it got PROCLAIMED an archaeological dig-site by the local government, I wouldn't tell anyone where it was. That's exactly what this group is doing.

And if you watch the video--it looks pretty convincing to me. What issues do you have with it?

For me, there are several things wrong with this article. The spokesperson states that they found seven wooden compartments. Can these compartments truely be classified as a boat? What shape are they? are they in line or scattered about? Also, the statement 'It's not 100 per cent that it is Noah's Ark, but we think it is 99.9 per cent that this is it,' is made by a filmmaker, not an archeologist, historian or religeous scholar.

The wood has been allegedly carbon dated to around 2800bc. It is around this time that we see the unification of Egypt, and the building of the Pyramids. This would not have been possible had the world been destroyed by flood.

Also the article contradicts itself by stating:-

At a press conference yesterday to announce the discovery, another team member, Panda Lee, said: 'I saw a structure built with plank-like timber.

'Each plank was about eight inches wide. I could see tenons, proof of ancient construction predating the use of metal nails

And later states:-

The structure had several compartments, some with wooden beams, the team said.

The wooden walls of one compartment were smooth and curved while the video shown by the explorers revealed doors, staircases and nails.

The first structure describes seems to lack nails, whereas the second has nails used in its construction. Nails where certainly making an appearance around this time, so are we actually looking at separate structures from different dates, one pre and one post nails?

Then the statement:-

The group ruled out identifying the find as a human settlement, saying none had been found so high up in that area. They are keeping the exact location secret.

Just because none have been found in that area, doesn't mean there weren't any. It could even have been an outpost, shepherds settlement, crude temple complex or even an observatory.

Before any real conclusions can be drawn, the site needs to be identified, the wood age verified by dendrochronology, and the site mapped. Then any finds need to be analysed to see if they tie in the the Noahs ark claim, or rather (and I suspect this to be the case) point to another use for the site and buildings.

This is all assuming that what has been found is indeed a genuine archeological site.

[Watchers]

For me, there are several things wrong with this article. The spokesperson states that they found seven wooden compartments. Can these compartments truely be classified as a boat? What shape are they? are they in line or scattered about? Also, the statement 'It's not 100 per cent that it is Noah's Ark, but we think it is 99.9 per cent that this is it,' is made by a filmmaker, not an archeologist, historian or religeous scholar.

The wood has been allegedly carbon dated to around 2800bc. It is around this time that we see the unification of Egypt, and the building of the Pyramids. This would not have been possible had the world been destroyed by flood.

Also the article contradicts itself by stating:-

At a press conference yesterday to announce the discovery, another team member, Panda Lee, said: 'I saw a structure built with plank-like timber.

'Each plank was about eight inches wide. I could see tenons, proof of ancient construction predating the use of metal nails

And later states:-

The structure had several compartments, some with wooden beams, the team said.

The wooden walls of one compartment were smooth and curved while the video shown by the explorers revealed doors, staircases and nails.

The first structure describes seems to lack nails, whereas the second has nails used in its construction. Nails where certainly making an appearance around this time, so are we actually looking at separate structures from different dates, one pre and one post nails?

Then the statement:-

The group ruled out identifying the find as a human settlement, saying none had been found so high up in that area. They are keeping the exact location secret.

Just because none have been found in that area, doesn't mean there weren't any. It could even have been an outpost, shepherds settlement, crude temple complex or even an observatory.

Before any real conclusions can be drawn, the site needs to be identified, the wood age verified by dendrochronology, and the site mapped. Then any finds need to be analysed to see if they tie in the the Noahs ark claim, or rather (and I suspect this to be the case) point to another use for the site and buildings.

This is all assuming that what has been found is indeed a genuine archeological site.

I agree that it doesn't mean it's 100% Noah's Ark, but I think it's pretty compelling, and I definitely don't think it's a hoax.

There are several possibilities--first of all, the radiocarbon dating has to be taken with a grain of salt...it may only be approximate within a few hundred years.

As for the seven compartments...it's possible that there's more beneath them that hasn't been uncovered yet, or perhaps they are simply remnants of the boat's cabins scattered about--they wouldn't necessarily still be in a full boat form.

As for the nails (and perhaps another explanation for the cabins), it's very likely that when the Ark landed, they used the wood from the Ark to construct homes or some sort of settlement. Perhaps over time they used nails to repair it? Or maybe the mention of nails was a misstatement and there weren't any.

I feel that until more facts come out, it's up in the air...it could go either way to me (just some random settlement, or perhaps Noah's Ark).

[Tiggs]

An email from Dr Randall Price:

I was the archaeologist with the Chinese expedition in the summer of 2008 and was given photos of what they now are reporting to be the inside of the Ark. I and my partners invested $100,000 in this expedition (described below) which they have retained, despite their promise and our requests to return it, since it was not used for the expedition. The information given below is my opinion based on what I have seen and heard (from others who claim to have been eyewitnesses or know the exact details).

To make a long story short: this is all reported to be a fake. The photos were reputed to have been taken off site near the Black Sea, but the film footage the Chinese now have was shot on location on Mt. Ararat. In the late summer of 2008 ten Kurdish workers hired by Parasut, the guide used by the Chinese, are said to have planted large wood beams taken from an old structure in the Black Sea area (where the photos were originally taken) at the Mt. Ararat site. In the winter of 2008 a Chinese climber taken by Parasut’s men to the site saw the wood, but couldn’t get inside because of the severe weather conditions. During the summer of 2009 more wood was planted inside a cave at the site. The Chinese team went in the late summer of 2009 (I was there at the time and knew about the hoax) and was shown the cave with the wood and made their film. As I said, I have the photos of the inside of the so-called Ark (that show cobwebs in the corners of rafters – something just not possible in these conditions) and our Kurdish partner in Dogubabyazit (the village at the foot of Mt. Ararat) has all of the facts about the location, the men who planted the wood, and even the truck that transported it.

I think that just about covers it.

Edited May 1, 2010 by Tiggs

[Amberlight]

As usual with these outrageous claims - WE NEED MORE INFORMATION.

[Watchers]

An email from Dr Randall Price:

I was the archaeologist with the Chinese expedition in the summer of 2008 and was given photos of what they now are reporting to be the inside of the Ark. I and my partners invested $100,000 in this expedition (described below) which they have retained, despite their promise and our requests to return it, since it was not used for the expedition. The information given below is my opinion based on what I have seen and heard (from others who claim to have been eyewitnesses or know the exact details).

To make a long story short: this is all reported to be a fake. The photos were reputed to have been taken off site near the Black Sea, but the film footage the Chinese now have was shot on location on Mt. Ararat. In the late summer of 2008 ten Kurdish workers hired by Parasut, the guide used by the Chinese, are said to have planted large wood beams taken from an old structure in the Black Sea area (where the photos were originally taken) at the Mt. Ararat site. In the winter of 2008 a Chinese climber taken by Parasut’s men to the site saw the wood, but couldn’t get inside because of the severe weather conditions. During the summer of 2009 more wood was planted inside a cave at the site. The Chinese team went in the late summer of 2009 (I was there at the time and knew about the hoax) and was shown the cave with the wood and made their film. As I said, I have the photos of the inside of the so-called Ark (that show cobwebs in the corners of rafters – something just not possible in these conditions) and our Kurdish partner in Dogubabyazit (the village at the foot of Mt. Ararat) has all of the facts about the location, the men who planted the wood, and even the truck that transported it.

I think that just about covers it.

That's disappointing if these accusations turn out to be true. But who knows, disgruntled people will go to great lengths to slander legitimate efforts.

[voiceofreason]

I agree that it doesn't mean it's 100% Noah's Ark, but I think it's pretty compelling, and I definitely don't think it's a hoax.

There are several possibilities--first of all, the radiocarbon dating has to be taken with a grain of salt...it may only be approximate within a few hundred years.

As for the seven compartments...it's possible that there's more beneath them that hasn't been uncovered yet, or perhaps they are simply remnants of the boat's cabins scattered about--they wouldn't necessarily still be in a full boat form.

As for the nails (and perhaps another explanation for the cabins), it's very likely that when the Ark landed, they used the wood from the Ark to construct homes or some sort of settlement. Perhaps over time they used nails to repair it? Or maybe the mention of nails was a misstatement and there weren't any.

I feel that until more facts come out, it's up in the air...it could go either way to me (just some random settlement, or perhaps Noah's Ark).

Fair points but what about the alleged carbon date age of 2800bc? The building of the pyramids at this time show that the flood couldn't have happened (in this era at least) as they would be impossible to build under 12,000 ft of water. plus, everyone would have drowned so there would be no one left to build them. (Which brings us to the aliens built the pyramids rubbish). Also, there is the evidence presented by Tiggs in the post below mine.