Noah's Ark

[East of Eden]

Anyone want to speculate how a large boat got on top of a 13,000' mountain?




Has Noah's Ark Been Found on Turkish Mountaintop?

FOXNews.com

The remains of Noah's Ark have been discovered 13,000 feet up a Turkish mountain -- according to a sensational claim by evangelical explorers.


printemailshare recommend (17)
Noahs Ark Ministries International

An explorer examines wooden beams inside what some are nearly certain is the remains of Noah's Ark.

A group of Chinese and Turkish evangelical explorers say wooden remains they have discovered on Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey are the remains of Noah's Ark.

The group claims that carbon dating proves the relics are 4,800 years old, meaning they date to around the same time the ark was said to be afloat. Mt. Ararat has long been suspected as the final resting place of the craft by evangelicals and literalists hoping to validate biblical stories.

Yeung Wing-Cheung, from the Noah's Ark Ministries International research team that made the discovery, said: "It's not 100 percent that it is Noah's Ark, but we think it is 99.9 percent that this is it."

There have been several reported discoveries of the remains of Noah's Ark over the years, most notably a find by archaeologist Ron Wyatt in 1987. At the time, the Turkish government officially declared a national park around his find, a boat-shaped object stretched across the mountains of Ararat.

Nevertheless, the evangelical ministry remains convinced that the current find is in fact more likely to be the actual artifact, calling upon Dutch Ark researcher Gerrit Aalten to verify its legitimacy.

The significance of this find is that for the first time in history the discovery of Noahs Ark is well documented and revealed to the worldwide community, Aalten said at a press conference announcing the find. Citing the many details that match historical accounts of the Ark, he believes it to be a legitimate archaeological discovery.

Theres a tremendous amount of solid evidence that the structure found on Mount Ararat in Eastern Turkey is the legendary Ark of Noah, said Aalten.

Representatives of Noah's Ark Ministries said the structure contained several compartments, some with wooden beams, that they believe were used to house animals.The group of evangelical archaeologists ruled out an established human settlement on the grounds none have ever been found above 11,000 feet in the vicinity, Yeung said.

During the press conference, team member Panda Lee described visiting the site. In October 2008, I climbed the mountain with the Turkish team. At an elevation of more than 4,000 meters, I saw a structure built with plank-like timber. Each plank was about 8 inches wide. I could see tenons, proof of ancient construction predating the use of metal nails."

We walked about 100 meters to another site. I could see broken wood fragments embedded in a glacier, and some 20 meters long. I surveyed the landscape and found that the wooden structure was permanently covered by ice and volcanic rocks."

Local Turkish officials will ask the central government in Ankara to apply for UNESCO World Heritage status so the site can be protected while a major archaeological dig is conducted.

The biblical story says that God decided to flood the Earth after seeing how corrupt it was. He then told Noah to build an ark and fill it with two of every animal species.

After the flood waters receded, the Bible says, the ark came to rest on a mountain. Many believe that Mount Ararat, the highest point in the region, is where the ark and her inhabitants ran aground.

[Crazy Ivan]

To believe the myth of Noah's Ark, one would have to believe that the O T is true history.

I do.

Are you aware of how many animals would need to be rounded up to observe the OT? Unless you're okay with speciation, which I'll assume you're not.

[East of Eden]

To believe the myth of Noah's Ark, one would have to believe that the O T is true history.

I do.

Are you aware of how many animals would need to be rounded up to observe the OT? Unless you're okay with speciation, which I'll assume you're not.

Yes, and I've seen estimates saying given the size of the Ark, they would fit. Not all would have to be adults.

[Crazy Ivan]

To believe the myth of Noah's Ark, one would have to believe that the O T is true history.

I do.

Are you aware of how many animals would need to be rounded up to observe the OT? Unless you're okay with speciation, which I'll assume you're not.

Yes, and I've seen estimates saying given the size of the Ark, they would fit. Not all would have to be adults.

Indulge me with a ball park figure.

-edit: Not forgetting extinct species, which were obviously around at the time.

-reedit: And factoring in all the species Science hasn't identified yet, but that can be extrapolated to exist (90% more?) and that also had to be around at the time. Of course, you can apply that to land creatures only.

[East of Eden]

To believe the myth of Noah's Ark, one would have to believe that the O T is true history.

I do.

Are you aware of how many animals would need to be rounded up to observe the OT? Unless you're okay with speciation, which I'll assume you're not.

Yes, and I've seen estimates saying given the size of the Ark, they would fit. Not all would have to be adults.

Indulge me with a ball park figure.

-edit: Not forgetting extinct species, which were obviously around at the time.

-reedit: And factoring in all the species Science hasn't identified yet, but that can be extrapolated to exist (90% more?) and that also had to be around at the time. Of course, you can apply that to land creatures only.

http://www.gotquestions.org/noahs-ark-animals.html

[Crazy Ivan]

To believe the myth of Noah's Ark, one would have to believe that the O T is true history.

I do.

Are you aware of how many animals would need to be rounded up to observe the OT? Unless you're okay with speciation, which I'll assume you're not.

Yes, and I've seen estimates saying given the size of the Ark, they would fit. Not all would have to be adults.

Indulge me with a ball park figure.

-edit: Not forgetting extinct species, which were obviously around at the time.

-reedit: And factoring in all the species Science hasn't identified yet, but that can be extrapolated to exist (90% more?) and that also had to be around at the time. Of course, you can apply that to land creatures only.

http://www.gotquestions.org/noahs-ark-animals.html

I was under the impression this was a debate forum. Should I just post a link as a reply?

[JoeyKnothead]

http://www.gotquestions.org/noahs-ark-animals.html

I was under the impression this was a debate forum. Should I just post a link as a reply?

I went there for grits and giggles. They get around the problem of biomass by using "kinds" and "babies".

I consider the site evidence that humans can concoct all manner of stories and notions to support religious claims - while never actually offering anything tangible by way of repeatable, testable, verifiable and more importantly observable evidence.

[McCulloch]

Moderator Opinion

I was under the impression this was a debate forum. Should I just post a link as a reply?

Yes, this is a debate forum. A link is an appropriate way to cite your source, but it is not in itself considered an argument. Debaters should summarize, quote or otherwise put the relevant argument into the debate thread from the cited material. Debate does not consist of a battle of links.

[Zzyzx]

.

I was under the impression this was a debate forum. Should I just post a link as a reply?

Some debate, some preach, some duck questions. Perhaps the latter two think that impresses or fools readers?????

[Grumpy]

East of Eden

You can only disprove miracles if you can disprove God, and you can't do that. Because you haven't seen any isn't proof that they never happened.

Actually, miracles or claims of miracles have not been shown to be more than imagination and myth. We have no need to "disprove" them as you have not shown any reason whatsoever to think they actually occurred.

Almost all religions claim miracles, are they too considered by you to be factual?

Grumpy

[McCulloch]

John Woodmorappe, author of the definitive Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study, made several invalid assumptions that, when corrected, fill the ark past overflowing

• The "kinds" used in Woodmorappe's calculations were genera. Taking individual species, which is a much more reasonable definition of kind in the context of the ark, increases the load three- or fourfold.
• Woodmorappe did not account for the extra clean animals, considering their number negligible. However, he believed that the only clean animals would be thirteen domestic ruminants traditionally considered clean. But if the Bible is taken literally, all ruminants would be considered clean. Under Woodmorappe's assumption, the extra clean animals would increase the load by 1.5 percent, or 3 percent if you include seven pairs of the animals. Taking all ruminants increases the load by 14 or 28 percent.
• Woodmorappe included only juveniles of animals larger than about 10 kg. This assumption, however, is unbiblical and, for some animals, impractical. Taking adult animals would increase the total mass more than thirteenfold. Taking even some of these animals as adults or taking older juveniles could easily fill the ark beyond capacity.
• According to the creation model, dinosaurs and other animals now extinct would have been alive at the time of the flood and therefore would be aboard the ark. The only extinct animals that Woodmorappe included in his calculations were the ones that were known at the time. Since then, many other dinosaur genera have been discovered, and no doubt there are many more as yet undiscovered.
• Woodmorappe excluded land invertebrates from his calculations, despite the fact that they must have been aboard the ark. These animals are small enough that they alone would not have increased the load significantly, but they are numerous enough and have many special requirements, so the infrastructure needed to house and care for them would have been significant.
• Woodmorappe made no allowance for food spoilage or water wasted from spilling, although the conditions he described aboard the ark guarantee that both of these problems would have been severe.

From Claim CH512: Talk Origins

See also:
Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study
by Glenn Morton
Copyright 1996-2003
[Posted: November 22, 1996]
A rebuttal written by John Woodmorappe
Problems fitting the animals in the Ark, Problems with a Global Flood, Second Edition by Mark Isaak
The Bible (Gen. 7:2) speaks of "the male and his mate," indicating that the animals were at sexual maturity.