Noah's Ark Discovery?

Heard of the idea since I was a child in the 70s. Seems to resurface every so often 🤔

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
Ham populated Egypt.

You made that up. There is NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE of this. And as I said, if Noahs offspring were to have gone to Egypt, then Egypt would be speaking their language instead of Egyptian. And Egypt would have their culture instead of Egyptian. And Egypt would have the God of Noah instead of the Pagan gods. ALL evidence shows that your statement is not true.

Hyksos civilized it bringing in the domestication of livestock and horses and the chariot.

1650–1550 bc ... not 2400 bc. And they only were in part of Egypt. Considered invaders of Egyptians who still obviously lived there. Egypt continued on without interruption. The Egyptian culture and religions continued on without interruption. The Hyksos were short lived and are irrelevant to the Noahs Ark story.

Modern anthropology is destroying your ancient hypothesis.

No. It helps prove the ancient historical facts that I presented ... whereas your statements are all destroyed.

And your timeliness create a 300-400 year dark period in bothe Rome and Greek history trying to conform to Egypt.

You keep saying that, and it simply is not true.

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt, then why does Egypt speak Egyptian and not Noahs language? If Noahs offspring went to Egypt, then why did Egypt keep their pagan gods and not have the God of Noah who had just saved them from the flood? Same with Rome. Same with Greece. Same with China. Same with EVERYONE. Everyone around the world kept their own languages, their own writings, their own culture, their own gods ... none have Noahs. And they would have Noahs if they were offspring of his.

Your premise is so easily destroyed with common sense ... wow ... easy pickings!

And that matters very little making it fact or not just because you call it stupid just because it differs.

Your imaginative 'history' makes ZERO sense. Easily destroyed. Bu-bye.

Given "Noah's Ark" is a fairy tale, no, it hasn't been found.

a reply to: FarmerSimulation

According to the Bible, Ham's descendants include various peoples, but it doesn't specifically mention him populating Egypt.

If so please show us or indicate where.

a reply to: FlyersFan

An amazing DNA discovery supports the Bible story that says Egypt’s first dynasty is descended from Noah’s son Ham.  The groundbreaking research is based on DNA taken from Egyptian mummies.

CNN reports that researchers from the University of Tuebingen and the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History in Jena found “unexpected results” when decoding the genome of ancient Egyptians discovered in Abusir-el Meleq, Middle Egypt.

Based on their findings, published in Nature Communications, genetic scientists concluded that preserved remains were
the closest genetic relatives of Neolithic and Bronze Age populations from the Near East, Anatolia and Eastern Mediterranean Europeans.

“We found the ancient Egyptian samples falling distinct from modern Egyptians, and closer towards Near Eastern and European samples,” the researchers noted. “In contrast, modern Egyptians are shifted towards sub-Saharan African populations.”



These scientific findings parallel biblical accounts tracing the First Egyptian Dynasty back to Biblical Ham.

“According to the Bible, Mizraim settled in Egypt whereas Cush settled in Africa, establishing two distinct and
separate nations that did not share a common heritage,” notes BIN. “The scientific theory implies the origins of Africa
and Egypt were the same.”

metrovoicenews.com...

The language is derived from pictographs and is Indo-European in origin.
After Babel when the languages were scrambled you saw people creating language from the same pictographs interpreting them the best they could.
The closest to the original language was the shemites as they did not participate with the Japhethites and Hamites in the building of the tower of Babel. (Indo-European-Aryan)
Noah had gone to stay with Shem in Anatolia.
Also see Chinese writing and their characters being similar to the paleo pictographs

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: FarmerSimulation

According to the Bible, Ham's descendants include various peoples, but it doesn't specifically mention him populating Egypt.

If so please show us or indicate where.

The Bible calls Egypt, "the land of Ham.
It was populated by Hams son, Mizraim

CNN reports that researchers from the University of Tuebingen and the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History in Jena found “unexpected results” when decoding the genome of ancient Egyptians discovered in Abusir-el Meleq, Middle Egypt.

Based on their findings, published in Nature Communications, genetic scientists concluded that preserved remains were the closest genetic relatives of Neolithic and Bronze Age populations from the Near East, Anatolia and Eastern Mediterranean Europeans.

“We found the ancient Egyptian samples falling distinct from modern Egyptians, and closer towards Near Eastern and European samples,” the researchers noted. “In contrast, modern Egyptians are shifted towards sub-Saharan African populations.”

a reply to: FarmerSimulation

That's an OPINION PIECE. That's not evidence of Ham ever existing, nor of him an his offspring populating Egypt. Egyptian history and archeology and language and religion all show that opinion is flat out WRONG.

Link to the actual article and not the opinion piece - Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of Sub-Saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods

See that?? The actual information says 'suggests an increase of sub-saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods'. It doesn't say that Egypt was wiped out and restarted by Noahs offspring in 2400bc. It talks about different peoples immigrating into ancient Egypt from everywhere ... Middle East, Near East, Persia, all around the Mediterranean, Britain, etc etc

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt, then why does Egypt speak Egyptian and not Noahs language? If Noahs offspring went to Egypt, then why did Egypt keep their pagan gods and not have the God of Noah who had just saved them from the flood? Same with Rome. Same with Greece. Same with China. Same with EVERYONE. Everyone around the world kept their own languages, their own writings, their own culture, their own gods ... none have Noahs. And they would have Noahs if they were offspring of his.

THERE WAS NO FLOOD

originally posted by: FlyersFan
a reply to: FarmerSimulation

That's an OPINION PIECE. That's not evidence of Ham ever existing, nor of him an his offspring populating Egypt. Egyptian history and archeology and language and religion all show that opinion is flat out WRONG.

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt, then why does Egypt speak Egyptian and not Noahs language? If Noahs offspring went to Egypt, then why did Egypt keep their pagan gods and not have the God of Noah who had just saved them from the flood? Same with Rome. Same with Greece. Same with China. Same with EVERYONE. Everyone around the world kept their own languages, their own writings, their own culture, their own gods ... none have Noahs. And they would have Noahs if they were offspring of his.

Ham was kicked out of the community of Noah and his other 2 sons.
Ham screwed Noah's wife and she went with Ham, actually Canaan.
They were very disruptive to the rest of the group and people.
Ham was told to leave

a reply to: FlyersFan

Just because you never read it makes it YOUR opinion piece.
How dishonest.
Here is the source it referenced to.
They cited it.

www.nature.com...

a reply to: FarmerSimulation
The Bible says no such thing. And even if it did, there would be no proof that it is true.

Again ... your version of reality makes no sense.

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt and repopulated a vacant Egypt, then why does Egypt speak Egyptian and not Noahs language? Supposedly Noahs offspring suddenly started speaking Egyptian ... a dead language?

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt and repopulated a vacant Egypt, then why did Egypt keep their pagan gods and not have the God of Noah who had just saved them from the flood? Supposedly Noahs offspring suddenly started worshipping the false gods of ancient Egypt?

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt and repopulated a vacant Egypt, then why did Egypt keep it's culture and not have the culture of Noah? Supposedly Noahs offspring suddenly adapted the Egyptian culture as it's own?

Same with Rome. Same with Greece. Same with China. Same with EVERYONE. Everyone around the world kept their own languages, their own writings, their own culture, their own gods ... none have Noahs. And they would have Noahs if they were offspring of his.

Your version of reality doesn't pass the smell test. It reeks of stupid.

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
Just because you never read it makes it YOUR opinion piece.
How dishonest.

word salad. YOU posted an OPINION PIECE. And that opinion piece is wrong.

Here is the source it referenced to.
They cited it.
www.nature.com...

I already posted the link. And NO, the actual science article does NOT say that Egypt was wiped out in 2400bc and repopulated solely with people from the Middle East. The OPINON PIECE is wrong.

Link to the actual article and not the opinion piece - Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of Sub-Saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods

See that?? The actual information says 'suggests an increase of sub-saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods'. It doesn't say that Egypt was wiped out and restarted by Noahs offspring in 2400bc. It talks about different peoples immigrating into ancient Egypt from everywhere ... Middle East, Near East, Persia, all around the Mediterranean, Britain, etc etc

It's your OPINION PIECE that is being dishonest and not FULLY discussing the actual results of the testing on the mummies. The actual science doesn't say anything even close to what he is claiming.

originally posted by: FlyersFan
a reply to: FarmerSimulation
The Bible says no such thing. And even if it did, there would be no proof that it is true.

Again ... your version of reality makes no sense.

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt and repopulated a vacant Egypt, then why does Egypt speak Egyptian and not Noahs language? Supposedly Noahs offspring suddenly started speaking Egyptian ... a dead language?

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt and repopulated a vacant Egypt, then why did Egypt keep their pagan gods and not have the God of Noah who had just saved them from the flood? Supposedly Noahs offspring suddenly started worshipping the false gods of ancient Egypt?

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt and repopulated a vacant Egypt, then why did Egypt keep it's culture and not have the culture of Noah? Supposedly Noahs offspring suddenly adapted the Egyptian culture as it's own?

Same with Rome. Same with Greece. Same with China. Same with EVERYONE. Everyone around the world kept their own languages, their own writings, their own culture, their own gods ... none have Noahs. And they would have Noahs if they were offspring of his.

Your version of reality doesn't pass the smell test. It reeks of stupid.

We find that ancient Egyptians are most closely related to Neolithic and Bronze Age samples in the Levant, as well as to Neolithic Anatolian and European populations (Fig. 5a,b). When comparing this pattern with modern Egyptians, we find that the ancient Egyptians are more closely related to all modern and ancient European populations that we tested

A quote from the link you posted

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation

We find that ancient Egyptians are most closely related to Neolithic and Bronze Age samples in the Levant, as well as to Neolithic Anatolian and European populations (Fig. 5a,b). When comparing this pattern with modern Egyptians, we find that the ancient Egyptians are more closely related to all modern and ancient European populations that we tested

A quote from the link you posted

AND THAT doesn't say the population was WIPED OUT and REPOPULATED solely with people from the Middle East. It simply does not. It is talking about immigration into an existing Egyptian population. Where the peoples came from. You don't understand what you are reading.

Again ... your version of reality makes no sense. ADDRESS THESE ISSUES ...

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt and repopulated a vacant Egypt, then why does Egypt speak Egyptian and not Noahs language? Supposedly Noahs offspring suddenly started speaking Egyptian ... a dead language?

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt and repopulated a vacant Egypt, then why did Egypt keep their pagan gods and not have the God of Noah who had just saved them from the flood? Supposedly Noahs offspring suddenly started worshipping the false gods of ancient Egypt?

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt and repopulated a vacant Egypt, then why did Egypt keep it's culture and not have the culture of Noah? Supposedly Noahs offspring suddenly adapted the Egyptian culture as it's own?

Same with Rome. Same with Greece. Same with China. Same with EVERYONE. Everyone around the world kept their own languages, their own writings, their own culture, their own gods ... none have Noahs. And they would have Noahs if they were offspring of his.

Your version of reality doesn't pass the smell test. It reeks of stupid.

originally posted by: FlyersFan
a reply to: FarmerSimulation
The Bible says no such thing. And even if it did, there would be no proof that it is true.

Again ... your version of reality makes no sense.

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt and repopulated a vacant Egypt, then why does Egypt speak Egyptian and not Noahs language? Supposedly Noahs offspring suddenly started speaking Egyptian ... a dead language?

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt and repopulated a vacant Egypt, then why did Egypt keep their pagan gods and not have the God of Noah who had just saved them from the flood? Supposedly Noahs offspring suddenly started worshipping the false gods of ancient Egypt?

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt and repopulated a vacant Egypt, then why did Egypt keep it's culture and not have the culture of Noah? Supposedly Noahs offspring suddenly adapted the Egyptian culture as it's own?

Same with Rome. Same with Greece. Same with China. Same with EVERYONE. Everyone around the world kept their own languages, their own writings, their own culture, their own gods ... none have Noahs. And they would have Noahs if they were offspring of his.

Your version of reality doesn't pass the smell test. It reeks of stupid.

Ham is Ra is Baal.
The sun God.
Noah rejected Him. Why would he worship him?
And vice versa.
Why would Ham honor Noah and the Most High?
Ham never honored them.
He was kicked out, told to leave, don't come back.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
Just because you never read it makes it YOUR opinion piece.
How dishonest.

word salad. YOU posted an OPINION PIECE. And that opinion piece is wrong.

Here is the source it referenced to.
They cited it.
www.nature.com...

I already posted the link. And NO, the actual science article does NOT say that Egypt was wiped out in 2400bc and repopulated solely with people from the Middle East. The OPINON PIECE is wrong.

Link to the actual article and not the opinion piece - Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of Sub-Saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods

See that?? The actual information says 'suggests an increase of sub-saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods'. It doesn't say that Egypt was wiped out and restarted by Noahs offspring in 2400bc. It talks about different peoples immigrating into ancient Egypt from everywhere ... Middle East, Near East, Persia, all around the Mediterranean, Britain, etc etc

It's your OPINION PIECE that is being dishonest and not FULLY discussing the actual results of the testing on the mummies. The actual science doesn't say anything even close to what he is claiming.

Lol
You inserted ALL OF THAT.
You made it your opinion piece.
Wt? Are you talking about?
The dna showed the mummies tested came from the Near East, the Levant and Anatolia regions matching dna from haplogroups with Indo Europeans

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
Ham is Ra is Baal.
The sun God.
Noah rejected Him. Why would he worship him?

You sure do play fast and loose with the Bible. It says no such thing.

And vice versa.
Why would Ham honor Noah and the Most High?
Ham never honored them.
He was kicked out, told to leave, don't come back.

NOAH didn't exist. Therefore Ham didn't exist. We know where the Noahs Ark myth comes from. Sumeria. It was ripped off by the Hebrews and adapted to their own culture and religion.

And you fail to adequately address these -

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt and repopulated a vacant Egypt, then why does Egypt speak Egyptian and not Noahs language? Supposedly Noahs offspring suddenly started speaking Egyptian ... a dead language?

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt and repopulated a vacant Egypt, then why did Egypt keep their pagan gods and not have the God of Noah who had just saved them from the flood? Supposedly Noahs offspring suddenly started worshipping the false gods of ancient Egypt?

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt and repopulated a vacant Egypt, then why did Egypt keep it's culture and not have the culture of Noah? Supposedly Noahs offspring suddenly adapted the Egyptian culture as it's own?

Same with Rome. Same with Greece. Same with China. Same with EVERYONE. Everyone around the world kept their own languages, their own writings, their own culture, their own gods ... none have Noahs. And they would have Noahs if they were offspring of his.

Your version of reality doesn't pass the smell test. It reeks of stupid.

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
The dna showed the mummies tested came from the Near East, the Levant and Anatolia regions matching dna from haplogroups with Indo Europeans

The ENTIRE article shows that the DNA shows immigrants from all over the area and that there was no WIPING OUT of the Egyptian population and REPOPULATING solely with Middle Eastern immigrants. It simply does not say that anywhere in the article. You are cherry picking a line to try to match your imaginative narrative ... but the entire article says nothing even close to what you are claiming.

It also says that Egypt had immigrants from Africa come in after the immigrants from the Mediterranean and Near/Middle East. Different DNA ... once again proving that the world didn't repopulate from just Noah and his offspring.

Learn how to read. Seriously.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
Ham is Ra is Baal.
The sun God.
Noah rejected Him. Why would he worship him?

You sure do play fast and loose with the Bible. It says no such thing.

And vice versa.
Why would Ham honor Noah and the Most High?
Ham never honored them.
He was kicked out, told to leave, don't come back.

NOAH didn't exist. Therefore Ham didn't exist. We know where the Noahs Ark myth comes from. Sumeria. It was ripped off by the Hebrews and adapted to their own culture and religion.

And you fail to adequately address these -

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt and repopulated a vacant Egypt, then why does Egypt speak Egyptian and not Noahs language? Supposedly Noahs offspring suddenly started speaking Egyptian ... a dead language?

If Noahs offspring went to Egypt and repopulated a vacant Egypt, then why did Egypt keep their pagan gods and not have the God of Noah who had just saved them from the flood? Supposedly Noahs offspring suddenly started
worshipping the false gods of ancient Egypt?

Noah was a king in Sumer.

Babel. They all had to use the paleo pictographs to form their tongues.
Shem was the closest to the original.

They deified themselves.
Ham being Ra.
Osiris being Nimrod.


Noahs offspring created Egyptian culture.
You are talking in circles.

Ham hated Noah.
He screwed his mother, Noahs wife and bore Cush.
Canaan did the same. He screwed Noahs wife.

Here is where I am possibly going to venture off from the articles both of us are addressing.
I think Robert Sepehr is correct in claiming Ham was white.
I believe Naamah (Noahs 2nd, maybe 3rd wife) was black.
And she is the black Madonna with black child(Cush), who was intersex and had no children due to inbreeding.
Canaan was black as well.
But I am now tending to think Ham was white unlike the depictions in these articles you and I are addressing.


If Noahs offspring went to Egypt and repopulated a vacant Egypt, then why did Egypt keep it's culture and not have the culture of Noah? Supposedly Noahs offspring suddenly adapted the Egyptian culture as it's own?

Same with Rome. Same with Greece. Same with China. Same with EVERYONE. Everyone around the world kept their own languages, their own writings, their own culture, their own gods ... none have Noahs. And they would have Noahs if they were offspring of his.

Your version of reality doesn't pass the smell test. It reeks of stupid.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
The dna showed the mummies tested came from the Near East, the Levant and Anatolia regions matching dna from haplogroups with Indo Europeans

The ENTIRE article shows that the DNA shows immigrants from all over the area and that there was no WIPING OUT of the Egyptian population and REPOPULATING solely with Middle Eastern immigrants. It simply does not say that anywhere in the article. You are cherry picking a line to try to match your imaginative narrative ... but the entire article says nothing even close to what you are claiming.

It also says that Egypt had immigrants from Africa come in after the immigrants from the Mediterranean and Near/Middle East. Different DNA ... once again proving that the world didn't repopulate from just Noah and his offspring.


Learn how to read. Seriously.

Dude.
You keep adding things to the study that the study never addressed or claimed.
And then you say I cannot read.
I quoted the study.
They came from haplogroups matching Indo european

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
Noah was a king in Sumer.

Noah would have been king of NOBODY. There wouldn't have been anyone to rule over.

The NOAH story comes from earlier stories out of Sumer. Stolen by the Hebrews. Names changed. Story changed to fit the Hebrew religion. There was no NOAH.

Babel. They all had to use the paleo pictographs to form their tongues.
Shem was the closest to the original.

Word salad. That makes absolutely no sense.

If you are trying to talk about languages ... the Egyptian language was the same before, during and after the 2400bc alleged flood period. Any offspring of Noah would not have known the language ... yet you want us to think they suddenly started speaking and writing a dead language and adopting the dead culture and dead gods of the wiped out Egypt. MAKES NO SENSE.

They deified themselves.
Ham being Ra.
Osiris being Nimrod.

The Egyptian god RA PREDATES the 2400BC flood time period. So no.
Your imaginary fellow 'Ham' could not have been RA.

Noahs offspring created Egyptian culture.
You are talking in circles.

No. The Egyptian culture, gods, language all existed before, during and after 2400BC. UNCHANGED. Noahs offspring did NOT create Egyptian culture nor the Egyptian language. Easily proven.

Ham hated Noah.
He screwed his mother, Noahs wife and bore Cush.
Canaan did the same. He screwed Noahs wife.

Maybe. Maybe not. Scholars disagree. They were all imaginary and didn't really exist so it really doesn't matter anyways.