Noah's Ark found?

[MRC_Hans]

Alright, fine. I guess there's no possibility that this could be Noah's Ark. None whatsoever. Case closed.

Wrong. There is possibility. However, it is so small that we need to devote our lives to better subjects. Case closed pending more convincing evidence.

I choose to make up my mind after compelling evidence is shown, not before. Maybe I don't fully understand the concept, then, of skepticism.

Maybe not. Or maybe you do. Try this: I claim that Danish farmers have developed a race of pigs that are invisible, can fly, eat practically nothing, and still produce twice the amount of meat compared to ordinary pigs.

Will you wait for the evidence before making up your mind on this story?

Hans

 

[devnull]

Not as much as my head hurts when I read your evolutionist drivel. : )

Except that your concept of the ark (as outlined in your link) would require accelerated evolution to pull off.

So which? Evolution or no evolution?

 

[Red3]

Looks like it could be some kind of old mining site.

 

[Marduk]

Come back Ron Wyatt
All is forgiven

really though what a load of bullcrap. this is the same claim made in 2007 when no one paid any attention, its taken them three years to find a lab that would do carbon dating (alarm bells) and they have presented zero evidence that the wood they analysed came from anywhere significant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Searches_for_Noah's_Ark#Locating_the_mountains_of_Ararat
wiki even has this info

In 2007, a joint Turkish-Hong Kong expedition including members of Noah's Ark Ministries International claimed to find an unusual cave with fossilized wooden walls on Mount Ararat, well above the vegetation line. This 2007 expedition marked the first time in history that an alleged material sample of Noah's Ark was retrieved for lab analysis; the sample was determined by the Department of Earth Sciences at the University of Hong Kong to be petrified wood, although the origin of the material remains uncertain. However, since the discovery in 2008 there have been no findings linking this sample to Noah's Ark.[20] In 2010, members of Noah's Ark Ministries International reported that carbon dating suggests the wood is 4,800 years old which they believe to be the date of the Flood. They also deny that there was any human settlement at the site

How do you spell H-O-A-X


gotta love the believers in this thread though
desperate much

Domesticated dogs can all interbreed. So speciation has not yet occured among them.

When was the last time you saw a chichuaua crossed with a great Dane ?

 

[Monketi Ghost]

This thread reminds me of something hilarious that happened when I was a kid.

My mom was standing near me and my sister, when she asked, "Did you hear about Noah's Ark?"

My sister, a blossoming Christian fundie, smirkingly replied, "They found it, didn't they?"

Mom and I looked at each other with a bemused glance, and my mom said, "No, it's going out of business."

Noah's Ark was a local store.

 

[Oystein]

Alright, fine. I guess there's no possibility that this could be Noah's Ark. None whatsoever. Case closed.

I choose to make up my mind after compelling evidence is shown, not before. Maybe I don't fully understand the concept, then, of skepticism.

Yes. Possibility for there to be an ark that has in historical time floated on the surface of the sea and have stranded high up on Mt. Ararat is precisely zero.

So any object found there high up on Mt. Ararat, is, given the ex-ante probability of the existence of such a thing (zero), zero. Simply because of the fact that zero times x is always zero, regardless of what x is.

If x is the probability that an archeological find in an area, said to have been the scene of an ark stranding once uopn a time, is 1, then the Baysean probabilty of that find to be Noah's ark is 0, because 0*1=0.

Of course the probability of an archeological find atop a mountain of that size is, regardless of any myths pertaining to that mountain, much much smaller than 1, more like verrrrrrrrrrrrry close to zero.
0.0000001*0 = 0 still.


Case closed.


Unless you want to content that a global flood that rises high enough to drop a boat atop Mt. Arafat is at all possible.

 

[MRC_Hans]

1. Every animal would need feeding. Not only during the flood but afterwards until plants can grow again. However there is no space for food.

2. Then how do we go from having only a few species of dog to many species of dog? Evolution?

3. They did not carry any plants. So most plant life would be extinct. Some might grow from seeds. But then trees can take years to grow back. Tough luck on any animal that depends on trees.

4. The ark would be much bigger than any wooden ship ever built. There would be reasons why wooden ships would not be this big.

5. Who is going to look after all the animals?

6. Who is going to sail the ark?

On #6: I think the idea is that they just drifted with the wind. Possibly with dredge anchors to keep the bow turned into the waves. That is really the thing to do when you have nowhere to go anyhow.

HOWEVER, this shows another caveat: So, according to legend the Ark drifted around till the waters subsided so much that it was grounded on Mt. Ararat. So we have this huge, heavily loaded wooden ship drifting by the wind on the largest open sea ever seen on the planet, and it runs onto a rock! What happens when a large wooden vessel drifts onto a rock sticking up in open sea, even in relatively calm weather? .... Right! It will sink. Even on a dead calm day there will be an ocean swell that can beat a battleship to bits if it strands on an isolated rock!

This legend was so obviously constructed by people with no knowledge of the sea.

Hans

 

[timhau]

I choose to make up my mind after compelling evidence is shown, not before.

What would be compellling evidence that it's not Noah's Ark?

 

[timhau]

How did the marsupials get to Australia from Ararat 4,000 years ago?

Life boat.

 

[Dats]

How did the marsupials get to Australia from Ararat 4,000 years ago?

Ararat is in Australia only a couple of hours north west of Melbourne.

 

[rjh01]

On #6: I think the idea is that they just drifted with the wind. Possibly with dredge anchors to keep the bow turned into the waves. That is really the thing to do when you have nowhere to go anyhow.
<snip>

If they had a type of anchor that went to the bottom of the sea then the rope must be very long. If the sea covered the entire world that means that they would be over many tens of thousands of feet of sea. Now how long a rope would be needed?

Then a big deep sea would sometimes have huge waves. That would cause enormous stress on the ship. I wonder how they fixed the leaks?

The more thought that is put into Noah's ark the more silly it looks.

 

[Brown]

Here are a few cross-references. From a thread dealing with an expedition to find the relic in question:

Gen. 8:4: "And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat." Contrary to popular belief, Genesis does NOT say that the ark rested on Mount Ararat (what is now called Greater Ararat). Rather, the ark rested upon mountains in a region called Ararat.

The region that was known as Ararat in ancient times did not have Greater Ararat in it.

From a different thread:

It is quite possible that the expedition will find something. If memory serves, there are historical reports of natives who built some "ruins" that could be shown to faithful pilgrims. The potential for pious fraud is very serious.

My initial reaction, therefore, is that this "find" is very unlikely to be what the finders claim it is. Considering the extreme levels of deceit (pious and otherwise) that have surrounded this relic in the past, the burden of proving provenance ought to be exceptionally high.

 

[learner]

It can't be Noahs Ark because the Flood did not happen. Unless hypothetical, Pondering the existence of something resulting from an impossibility is daft.

 

[Zep]

Ararat is in Australia only a couple of hours north west of Melbourne.

Have they got any arks there? Or any 12,000 foot snow-capped mountains someone has missed seeing?

Anyway, if the ark did run aground there, the reverse situation holds true for the English hedgehog - how did it get from rural south-eastern Australia all the way to the UK without a trace of it being found in Ararat or anywhere between?


Oh yeah. Lifeboats. Someone did say!

 

[Zep]

It can't be Noahs Ark because the Flood did not happen. Unless hypothetical, Pondering the existence of something resulting from an impossibility is daft.

FYI, they got past the "daft" checkpoint some time ago. They are now descended to fraudulent money-grabbing loonie-bin escapees.

 

[Complexity]

I posted it for informative purposes not to support any credibility. In fact, I didn't even read it. But OK. I can understand you discomfort my friend.

Nice attempt to backtrack, but you can't slither away.

(Lie, lie, lie, lie, lie)

 

[MG1962]

If they had a type of anchor that went to the bottom of the sea then the rope must be very long. If the sea covered the entire world that means that they would be over many tens of thousands of feet of sea. Now how long a rope would be needed?

I am not sure if they had the technology back then, but the most obvious way to control a vessel in that situation would be a sea anchor

 

[Complexity]

I'm not Complexity, and he will answer or not if he wants, but I'd just like to say this: This is just as likely to be Noah's Ark as it is to be the Elven Ship that carried Frodo and Bilbo to The Undying Lands.

(Shh!!! Over here. If I continue to pull this one thread that I found, NurseDan will unravel. Pretty cool, eh?)

 

[MRC_Hans]

If they had a type of anchor that went to the bottom of the sea then the rope must be very long. If the sea covered the entire world that means that they would be over many tens of thousands of feet of sea. Now how long a rope would be needed?

Sorry, I used the wrong word. Drogue anchor is the English term, sorry about that. A drogue anchor presents a resistance to the water and is dragged behind a boat as it drifts with the wind. This can stabilize the movements of the vessel and keep it presenting on end to the waves. This is a well-known way to help a ship ride out a storm in open sea.
The rope needs not be particularly long.

In some apologist articles, they claim that such anchors on the Ark were made of rock, but that is neither necessary nor practical. Your typical drogue consists of a conical canvas tube, much like a thick windsock, with a wooden cross holding the upstream (large) opening open. A rope is tied to the cross intersection, and when you drag it, it positions itself just under the water surface, where it also serves the purpose of dampening the wave crests, so you get fewer waves breaking over the ship. Getting drogues back in without a winch is a - drag -, but I suppose Noah could just cut them loose when his journey was over. So this particular part of the story, which is NOT in the Bible, but part of later rationalization, makes perfect sense.

Then a big deep sea would sometimes have huge waves. That would cause enormous stress on the ship. I wonder how they fixed the leaks?

Yeah, that would require a really sturdy construction. I suppose they could fill dung into the leaks.

The more thought that is put into Noah's ark the more silly it looks.

Quite.

Hans

 

[Skwinty]

Did the ark have a sacrificial anode for the Woodpeckers?