Noah’s Ark Found on Turkish Mountaintop

[Ahovking]

Warning Read the top post first​

i found this weeks ago but no one is talking about using carbon dating they belive they found Noah’s Ark.

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 Noah’s 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.

“There’s 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.

http://www.kidsolo.com/noahs-ark-found-on-turkish-mountaintop/714/

could this be a win for the bible or not

 

[Leifmk]

This happens every few years. It invariably amounts to nothing.

 

[Plotinus]

could this be a win for the bible or not

I don't know what you mean by "a win" for "the bible", but even if it could be proved that the remains come from a boat of roughly the right antiquity, it wouldn't prove anything about the Bible. It might just as well be the boat of Utnapishtim. Given that the Epic of Gilgamesh, in which the story of Utnapishtim and the flood occurs, is older than the book of Genesis (as we have it), one might think it's got a better claim to being authenticated by any ancient boat bits that get found.

 

[Tee Kay]

Taillesskangaru strikes again!

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=363333

Yeah, I cheated using the similar thread feature, but whatever

They found some old wood. Could be anything. And it doesn't prove the Bible's story anyway.

 

[classical_hero]

There are just so many things wrong with the Epic of Gilgamesh. First off, the boat is a cube, not good for sailing. Compare that to the Bible and and the description is ideal for such an occasion.

As to this, it is highly unlikely to be the ark due to how old the ark is and thus it is highly unlike to be around now.

 

[Plotinus]

Well, the biblical ark is basically a long box. Given that the purpose of the thing is just to float, not to "sail", I don't see that it makes much difference, although I agree that a cube as high as it is wide or long seems rather sub-optimal (no wonder we are told that "the launching was very difficult").

But my point, of course, wasn't that such a find is really evidence for the historicity of the Epic of Gilgamesh, more that to call it evidence for one old flood myth rather than another is just arbitrary. One of the problems with people who set store by this sort of thing is that they don't see the difference between finds which support a claim and finds which are consistent with a claim. In fact, I think the inability to tell the difference is one of the defining features of conspiracy theorists.

 

[Neonanocyborgasm]

There's got to be a way to stop all this aimless witnessing that goes on here.

 

[LightSpectra]

It's almost entirely certain, both from the writings of the earliest Christians and internal textual clues, that at least the first half of the Book of Genesis is a collection of allegories; it was not intended to be read as if it were a historical log.

 

[Plotinus]

I'm sure they're only saying that it might be "Noah's Ark" on the off-chance that some wealthy Christians or Christian foundations (or whoever else might be interested in the Biblical story of Noah and has oodles and oodles of cash) would give them money to do more EXPLORIN'

Since the article describes them as "evangelical explorers", presumably they are already backed by wealthy Christians.

If I were feeling critical, I'd comment that the Bible has a fair amount to say about what wealthy people should do with their money, and it doesn't mention using it to pay people to dig up old bits of wood in a rather pointless attempt to establish the historicity of the murkier parts of the Old Testament. Fortunately, though, I'm not.

 

[Tank_Guy#3]

You could drop the real ark right in the middle of Times Square and people would still doubt it. I think people don't really care about the Ark itself, but the stories that are attributed with it.

That's my opinion anyway.

 

[cardgame]

This happens every few years. It invariably amounts to nothing.

/thread

 

[Jarlaxe Baenre]

Warning: May be Offensive to Highly Religious People

Spoiler :

I bet that is the Ark. I think that whoever built the ark - if it really was "Noah" - built it on a mountain during the flood over there a few thousand years ago to become famous.

 

[LightSpectra]

That conspiracy theory somehow makes even less sense than anything Dan Brown has ever written.

 

[Yeekim]

You could drop the real ark right in the middle of Times Square and people would still doubt it. I think people don't really care about the Ark itself, but the story that are attributed with it.

That's my opinion anyway.

Well yeah, if an old wooden ship was discovered in the middle of Times Square, I sure of hell doubted it's the Ark.

That conspiracy theory somehow makes even less sense than anything Dan Brown has ever written.

Not possible. Making less sense than Dan Brown is harder than dividing by zero. (Although the makers of Assassins Creed are damn near).

 

[LightSpectra]

As someone who takes a professional interest in both theology and European history, I don't know whether to reprimand Dan Brown and his ilk for being so grievously unintelligent, or to thank them for keeping me steadily employed.

 

[Bill3000]

Shouldn't this be in the Arts & Entertainment forum?

 

[Lord Baal]

There are just so many things wrong with the Epic of Gilgamesh. First off, the boat is a cube, not good for sailing. Compare that to the Bible and and the description is ideal for such an occasion.

As to this, it is highly unlikely to be the ark due to how old the ark is and thus it is highly unlike to be around now.

Hang on, you can find problems with the Epic of Gilgamesh's description of the Ark, and not the Bible's? They're both pretty equally crappy designs for anything bar sinking.

 

[Masada]

As someone who takes a professional interest in both theology and European history, I don't know whether to reprimand Dan Brown and his ilk for being so grievously unintelligent, or to thank them for keeping me steadily employed.

The question here is will they destroy the market first?

 

[Beloved Warrior]

Well, the biblical ark is basically a long box. Given that the purpose of the thing is just to float, not to "sail", I don't see that it makes much difference, although I agree that a cube as high as it is wide or long seems rather sub-optimal (no wonder we are told that "the launching was very difficult").

But my point, of course, wasn't that such a find is really evidence for the historicity of the Epic of Gilgamesh, more that to call it evidence for one old flood myth rather than another is just arbitrary. One of the problems with people who set store by this sort of thing is that they don't see the difference between finds which support a claim and finds which are consistent with a claim. In fact, I think the inability to tell the difference is one of the defining features of conspiracy theorists.

Where did the idea that the ark is a "box" come from? Is it just that the Bible mentions the ark has three dimensions? Because modern ships have three dimensions as well. The length and breadth could just be the length and breadth at the longest and broadest points. Finding an ark atop Mt. Ararat that matches the dimensions given in the Bible would verify the biblical account because the Bible is the only book that makes these claims. And just because the Epic of Gilgamesh is earliest doesn't automatically mean it's more accurate. Most Christians believe that the origin of flood stories around the world are different cultures' accounts of the same event, they just believe that the Hebrew's account recorded in the Bible is the most accurate. And such a find as I described would verify this.

Hang on, you can find problems with the Epic of Gilgamesh's description of the Ark, and not the Bible's? They're both pretty equally crappy designs for anything bar sinking.

I've heard of at least one experiment done where a model ark copied from the Bible's design was compared against other ship designs, and the ark was supposedly one of the "best" designs. What makes you think that the biblical Ark's design is "crappy"?

 

[Plotinus]

Where did the idea that the ark is a "box" come from? Is it just that the Bible mentions the ark has three dimensions? Because modern ships have three dimensions as well. The length and breadth could just be the length and breadth at the longest and broadest points.

Well, all right, if you like, although in that case I'd say that the instructions that God gives Noah for making the thing in Genesis 6 are extremely vague. I don't see that it makes a great deal of difference though, and I don't see why the ark would need to be anything more than a box; I don't see why it would need a bow, for example - because all it has to do is float. It doesn't have to get from one place to another.

Finding an ark atop Mt. Ararat that matches the dimensions given in the Bible would verify the biblical account because the Bible is the only book that makes these claims.

That depends on what you mean by "verify". Such a find would be evidence for the truth of the biblical story, in the sense that, were the story actually true, such a find would be more probable than it would be were the story actually false. Making such a find would therefore raise the probability of the biblical story's truth. However, such a find would certainly not mean that the biblical story is true. It would not even (necessarily) make it more probable than not that the biblical story is true. After all, it could be the case that the ark, as described in Genesis 6, did really exist, but that the circumstances surrounding its creation were very different and that the story changed in the telling (although the dimensions of the boat were reported accurately). In which case, the only part of the biblical narrative whose truth would be confirmed would be the existence of such a boat - the rest of it could still be false. Or it could even be that the myth of the flood came first, and that someone later made an ark, following the description given in Genesis or in some earlier version of the story - perhaps just to see if it was possible. And that would be consistent with the entire story's being false.

And just because the Epic of Gilgamesh is earliest doesn't automatically mean it's more accurate.

Certainly it doesn't. I didn't mean to imply that it does.

Most Christians believe that the origin of flood stories around the world are different cultures' accounts of the same event, they just believe that the Hebrew's account recorded in the Bible is the most accurate. And such a find as I described would verify this.

I don't know if most Christians really believe that - perhaps they do - but as I say, whether such a find would "verify" this belief really depends on what you mean by "verify". Certainly the finding of an ark that matched the description given in Genesis 6, but which did not match the description of other versions of the story, would seem to be better evidence for the truth of the biblical story than for the truth of the other versions, but that would certainly stop well short of showing that any of these stories were actually true, as I said.