• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Noah's Ark found?

Marduk said:
No, specifically as you claimed that "some Biblical Archaeologists had been taken by Hucksters", I knew of two previous examples recently, that of the ivory pomegranate and that of the James Ossuary,
I was wondering if there was a market for things that Jesus (might possibly have) made back in his carpentry shop. Test tube holders, Spice racks, Wooden toy trucks, hammer handles etc etc

So I just wondered if you knew of any more examples than that, which, advise on how to find the right bible thumping market, in order, to make bundles of cash from some rich religious retards who don't know any better

I wasn't at all questioning the veracity of your post
:p.
Click to expand...

Ah, gotcha, I was confused :) The James ossuary would have been the first example I would have given as well, it's the first one I can think of as well. To be honest I'd have to pull out my old archaeology textbooks to give some lesser known examples that we studied back in school.

Also I should probably amend that statement, as the majority of cases we studied weren't cases in which real, actually, professionally trained with a phD archaeolgists were duped. It's really mostly people who are "self proclaimed archaeologists" who don't have actual training. Like that "Naked Archaeologist" Simcha Jacobovici. I can't stand that guy. I've seen his show and it's just terrible, and he's not even an archaeologist, he's a journalist. He'll believe anything anyone says to him. In one episode he was looking for evidence of the Biblical story of King Solomon. And this guy showed him two foundations of gates in two cities where King Solomon supposedly built gates. And that to this guy "strongly suggested" that the biblical King Solomon was real. That's what he accepts as "evidence." Pathetic.
 
Even if we were to ignore the fact that there's no geological or archaeological support for the Genesis flood, or if we were to postulate it was a local flood, only inundating the Near East, any speculation that this is Noah's ark runs up against a multitude of problems:

1) The source, the Sun, is hardly credible.

2) The discoverers, evangelical archaeologists (even assuming they actually have scientific credentials) are not an unbiased source of information. I would like corroboration from a variety of other researchers.

3) All we are shown in the article is a guy poking around in the interior of some enclosure. We would actually require images of the exterior of the putative ark, along with some measurements.

4) Even were we to accept the validity of a carbon date of 4,800 years ago, that would put the date at ca. 2,800 BCE. However, Sumerian civilization began in the fourth millennium, say at about 3,500 BCE, and Egyptian civilization began ca. 3,000 BCE. There is no evidence of destruction or disruption of either of these tow ancient civilizations ca. 2,800 BCE. So whatever artifact these guys found on Mt. Ararat wouldn't fit the time scale of even a local flood.

As has been noted by other posters, every so often there's another discovery of Noah's ark on Mt. Ararat. Every last one of the prior "finds" have quietly faded away, hence the periodic need for new ark discoveries.
 
Radrook said:
Study of ark dimentions in relation to seaworthiness
"In conclusion, the Ark as a drifting ship, is thus believed to have had a reasonable-beam-draft ratio for the safety of the hull, crew and cargo in the high winds and waves imposed on it by the Genesis Flood."
Click to expand...

But the cargo can't even fit in the thing in the first place, so I would say the whole thing is flawed. Then again, to be fair, I can't follow that link from work.
 
TimCallahan said:
Even if we were to ignore the fact that there's no geological or archaeological support for the Genesis flood, or if we were to postulate it was a local flood, only inundating the Near East, any speculation that this is Noah's ark runs up against a multitude of problems:

1) The source, the Sun, is hardly credible.

2) The discoverers, evangelical archaeologists (even assuming they actually have scientific credentials) are not an unbiased source of information. I would like corroboration from a variety of other researchers.

3) All we are shown in the article is a guy poking around in the interior of some enclosure. We would actually require images of the exterior of the putative ark, along with some measurements.

4) Even were we to accept the validity of a carbon date of 4,800 years ago, that would put the date at ca. 2,800 BCE. However, Sumerian civilization began in the fourth millennium, say at about 3,500 BCE, and Egyptian civilization began ca. 3,000 BCE. There is no evidence of destruction or disruption of either of these tow ancient civilizations ca. 2,800 BCE. So whatever artifact these guys found on Mt. Ararat wouldn't fit the time scale of even a local flood.

As has been noted by other posters, every so often there's another discovery of Noah's ark on Mt. Ararat. Every last one of the prior "finds" have quietly faded away, hence the periodic need for new ark discoveries.
Click to expand...

Okay, if we assume that the ark story is based on a local flood, and that there actually was some sort of boat that some guy put 40 or 50 animals in, there's no way the boat ends up at 4,000 meters on Mt. Ararat.
 
MG1962 said:
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
Click to expand...


The two sort of go together. Cloth or wood + rope = sea anchor. If they could sail they had one. The first sea anchor probably happened when the sail fell off the boat. Probably even if they didn't sail. In a small boat you can make a serviceable drogue just by dragging a line in the water.
 
pgwenthold said:
I disagree.

I dismiss this completely out of hand. Not because of any nonsense about the ark story (which it is) but because we've heard it all before. Every couple of years, there is another story about how some moron found the ark. The fact that someone else is coming along again to claim that no, this time we REALLY found the ark tells you about how legitimate those previous claims were.

I put claims that someone found the ark in the same bin as the end of the world dates. Just another idiot.

I have yet to been wrong.
Click to expand...

That's what I said.
 
Pure_Argent said:
OMG I WANNA PET IT

o
Click to expand...
.
Out in the desert at night with my telescope, I could hear all this pitter-pattering going on around me, but as it was the dark of the moon, couldn't see nuffink.
I took a flash photo of the ground nearby, and there were several of these running around.
With the number of holes in the ground, ground squirrels, chipmunks, lizards, snakes and these things all have places to hide when they need to.
I saw one chipmunk go into a hole, which had a dead one partially obscuring the entrance. Odd, that.
I'd wonder how any aspiring biologist in the days of the prophets or the lawgivers could even begin to examine an "unclean" animal to note anything about it, without being smote by one of the leaders yelling about blasphemy, like those loons that are yelling about the ones and zeros that were said to represent Moh in a bear suit, when it was Santa in fact.
Ignorance and hate based on religion is so demeaning to mankind, why do we put up with it?
 
quadraginta said:
The two sort of go together. Cloth or wood + rope = sea anchor. If they could sail they had one. The first sea anchor probably happened when the sail fell off the boat. Probably even if they didn't sail. In a small boat you can make a serviceable drogue just by dragging a line in the water.
Click to expand...
.
There's a whole bunch of stones with a perforation thru them that are the genuine drogue-stones suspended from the Ark to minimize the side-to-side wallowing in a heavy sea... I saw recently on Discovery, one.
That the stones are quarried from local rock which doesn't/didn't exist in Mesopotamia is a mere trifling objection to a ripping good yarn..
http://www.discoverynews.us/DISCOVERY MUSEUM/BibleLandsDisplay/Noah's_Ark/noahs_ark_4.html
 
Radrook said:
Study of ark dimentions in relation to seaworthiness




Anyone have a different result from a similar or identical test?

Another detailed study about the Ark's seaworthiness
http://www.biblicalcreation.org.uk/biblical_studies/bcs043.html
Click to expand...

There are a few problems with building a ship to the size of the supposed ark.
The strength of wood over such a large area.
Hogging and sagging.
Pumping the bilges.
Storing all that feed.
Mucking out.

The largest ships recovered from history are the Sun Barques from the boat burials at Khufu's Pyramid.
Each around 120 feet long.
The Ark is just a story ripped off from the Epic of Gilgamesh
 
Radrook said:
Study of ark dimentions in relation to seaworthiness




Anyone have a different result from a similar or identical test?

Another detailed study about the Ark's seaworthiness
http://www.biblicalcreation.org.uk/biblical_studies/bcs043.html
Click to expand...

TalkOrigins disagrees: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH508.html

To date no one has been able to build an all wooden boat anywhere near as large as the ark. Given the number of fundamentalist Christian millionaires, one wonders why they haven't built an ark to the dimensions in the Bible to show that it would hold up against the twisting and bending forces that would occur on a vessel that large.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom