ATS: New Satellite Photos Could Pinpoint Location of Noah's Ark

I'd like to point out that a boat could have ended up on a mountain because of a sudden cataclysmic flood event, such as what has been theorized by some for the end of the last Ice Age. Just because temperatures would have risen slowly doesn't mean that the waters would have risen slowly to match.

As the ice of the glaciers broke up or melted, water trapped underneath could come rushing out in larger waves instead of just the small trickles that have long been believed. These sudden deluges of water into an area would lead to the myths of the Great Flood that many civilizations around the world seem to share.

Sudden flooding could have caused giant waves as water and debris washed south into the Mediterranean, which may have sent the boat higher than believed possible under normal circumstances.

While this is purely conjecture at the moment, the idea makes some sense if you think about it.

Noah's ark was recently, completely, debunked by the BBC.
There is not enough water in the entire world (ice, humidity, etc included) to even do 1/3rd the extent of the damage as claimed in the Bible..
The ship claimed in the Bible was supposed to be the size of the Titanic. If built out of wood (they didnt have metal ship building capabilties for like another 6000 years) then it would have ripped apart at sea very easily.
Noah's Ark is in fact based upon a Babylonian (or Byzantinian? Not sure) story about an Iraqi merchant..
If you go to the bbc website I'm sure a quick search will yield a lot of results... It also discusses this photo.

my opinion is still that even if all polar caps melt and tops of all mountains even then the water couldn't have goten as high as it they want us to believe....
ararat is 5165m high it is not possible that the sea's and oceans got as high as that... and if we have to believe the versions of the bible (not original text) the ship of noah got stuck at the top after raining stopped and after a while water got a little bit lower...
if it lowered as quickly where did the 5165m+ level of water went to.... its not possible... only thing remaining for the story to go as it has ... its a space craft and the words of the original text is wrongly taken in to prospective... AGAIN!

so i go with the person replying before me...

[Edited on 27-4-2004 by MarkLuitzen]

Originally posted by browha
Noah's ark was recently, completely, debunked by the BBC.
There is not enough water in the entire world (ice, humidity, etc included) to even do 1/3rd the extent of the damage as claimed in the Bible..

Yes, and there isn't enough water on Mars to have carved the water canals and formed the empty lake beds, but there is a good chance it once existed. Hmmmmm

Well, I'm sure someone will want to reverse engineer it when they get there.

For all the comments about why it hasn't rotted, it's frozen in a glacier.

For the comments on plagiarism, plagiarism of what? This is one of the oldest stories recorded.

And for those who say there's not enough water on the earth to do this, remember this is an ast of God. To say that God can't do something or anything is to attempt to limit the power of God which is unlimited.

Maybe when someone gets there they'll find the ship's registration and logbook and put the whole thing to rest.

Originally posted by Netchicken
Ashley, its not often that you would find giant boats buried at the top of mountains.

Especially when the locals say it is Noah's ark.

However I have my doubts over this news info.

For the last 20 years or so they have been looking for it on Ararat, and nothing concrete is ever found. This is suprising as the mountain is not very high, its quite rolling instead of pointed. It can't be easy to HIDE anything up there, its been so well photographed.

However there are OTHER ranges in Northern Iran (somewhere near one of the 'stans) that are meant to be the place of the ARK as well. These places are REALLY difficult to get to, and seem more likely to be the place from my reading.

If the ranges were so hard to get to, then how did Noah and all those animals get off the boat and down off of the mountain...alive?

Oh yeah, wouldnt there be a weird concentration of strange animals over there....timberwolf maybe. Kangaroo?

If evolution does not exist, then all those animals had to on the ark. They had to get off at the certain mountain that the ark rested. The ark had to be BIG ENOUGH TO CARRY THESE ANIMALS.

What happened when they got off the boats, and the lions were all hungry and stuff. There were only two antelopes...what happens when they were done eating them?

Ok...last thing I need to complain about. There were only two animals of each on the boat. When the lions got done eating the antelopes on top of the mountain, they had to come down. Lions eat meat! What the heck did they eat?????? LOL. I don't see lions eating algea and tree bark. All the animals were killed in the flood. It weas all gone...UGH!!! My head is going to explode.

Just some randomn specific babling. It could have been a tiger, or any other meat eating animal. I am just trying to get a point across. The Idea of Noah's Ark is flawed severely on so many levels that it could never be reconciled. Tell me...How can the story of Noahs Ark be true without evolution?

[Edited on 4/27/2004 by Seapeople]

Originally posted by Seapeople
What happened when they got off the boats, and the lions were all hungry and stuff. There were only two antelopes...what happens when they were done eating them?

Well, actually the story says (Genesis 7:2) that there were 7 of every clean animal, and 2 of every unclean animal. Possibly the lions ate other things, say all the dead stuff laying around after the flood.

If there was an ARK on the mountain I cannot believe we wouldn't already know. Bad weather my butt, this area has been known for many years. If it existed you could heliocopter up and check it out. No where has hurricane type weather 24/7/365.
It has to be BS.

First and foremost, what you have to remember about myth and legend is that the story inevitably grows more and more exaggerated as you get further from the source era. This story would likely have taken place sometime in the neighborhood of at least 14,000 years ago. This could account for discrepancies in size of the flood, boat, population, etc.

Do I think that two or seven or any small number of every animal in the world could have fit into a boat? Not even close. Do I think a Titanic-sized boat was built out of wood tens of thousands of years ago? Highly unlikely, to say the least.

Do I think that its possible that this story has some basis in fact? Yes. That doesn't mean I think some guy named Noah talked to God and built the boat to survive 40 days and 40 nights of rain though.

What you have to keep in mind is that if the world wasn't so small a place as it is now, "all the animals in the world" could have simply been the perspective of one of the storytellers down through the generations before the story was "officially" recorded in the Bible. This story has been traced back as far as the ancient Babylonian and Sumerian myths, which would place it far before the compilation of the stories for the Bible.

So to give an example, let's say you hear someone individually name all the animals you've ever seen. Wouldn't that qualify as all the animals in the world to you? So if these people didn't know about any number even close to that many species of animals, then their perspective is radically different from what you're thinking. We're talking about going from a few million animals on a boat, using a modern idea of all the animals of the world, to a couple hundred at most, using their perspective on how many animals there are.

Just for the record, they didn't know about kangaroos in that region, so those wouldn't even be in their realm of thnking.

I'm not subscribing to the flood as an "act of God" theory either. I'm not big on "it has to be this way because the Bible declares it is so" or any other such argument. The Bible can be an interesting tool for archaeological research because it can give us some generalizations, places and ideas to look at, but taking it as the one and only truth is a bad idea, in terms of historical research. Like all other myths and religions, it must be viewed as potentially skewed by exaggerations in the story.

The guy in the story, who we now refer to as Noah, could have simply been a trader in the region who transported some livestock on a boat. Perhaps he was an entertainer, bringing a menagerie of animals as a traveling zoo of sorts.

These thoughts are the kind of things I try to keep in mind when reading stories about myth, religion, and legend.

If this anomaly is actually a boat at all, from the story or not, it could be a significant find for archaeology and those who study the history of our world's climate, weather, and temperature patterns. So let's just view it in that context for now. There will be plenty of time for debate about the boat's builder when all is said and done.

[Edited on 4/27/2004 by TheDemonHunter]

the weather isnt the reason an expedtion wasn't led it is because when we wanted to check it out it was in the 40s and the turkish goverment wouldnt let us up there because they were against us during ww2 and afterwards are new prez didnt care to lead an exped.

Originally posted by ashley
If a ship is found,why does it have to be Noahs ark. It could be the original ship the bible authors stole the story from..

This is interesting. If you could find this 'original ship' then the story has some truth - that is the point. The question is how much truth is in the legend. The writer is just telling a story that he or she heard. There is nothing to steal. There isn't any conspiracy.

It would be pretty easy to verify if the boat is the same as the one described in the Bible:

"15 This is how you are to build it: The ark is to be 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet high. 16 Make a roof for it and finish the ark to within 18 inches of the top. Put a door in the side of the ark and make lower, middle and upper decks." Genesis 6: 15-16

If the boat is there and fits the description then you can be pretty sure it's the boat in the legend. Scientific evidence supports the idea that there was a wide spread flood in the area at some point in history, but how could it have covered the whole earth? That is one of the many tough questions that come out of this story.

If it is the boat then we have physical evidence to support the legend, as well as evidence for the level of water covering the area. It would be a huge discovery, but In the end I don't think it is there.

The Bible is very accessible these days, but it is apparent that many here have not read the story. It is sort of disappointing that so many educated people have not read arguably the most influential piece of writing available to us, regardless of what one believes.

[Edited on 27-4-2004 by sirhc]

Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid
if it's not noah's ark, then i bet it'll be an ancient monestary of sorts. the prongs could have been from roof supports... but i guess we'll find out in coming months (hopefully).

Don't think it's a monastery - altitude is way too high and cold!

hate to break it to you but most likely all that object is is a rock. glacial movements would have it moved down the mt. by know.also a boat that big would never have been seaworthy

I think this is exciting news and I Hope that if Noah's ark is out there that we'll find it this time.

I believe the stor of Noah and the ark. I can't wait until there is more on this.

i believe the story to but i think it was exagerated just like many other stories in the bible. but i believe it is mostly true. the thing with adam living to be 993 or whatever it was i think that was exaggerated but maybe he lived a long time

thousands of years pass by and this "wooden ark" is supposed to have survived??? come on!!! doesn't wood rot? what was it 14000 years ago....and it is still there...puh-leaze

i'll still be interested in hearing what is actually found there, but I don't think it is "noah's ark".

well if the wood was frozen and never thawed out it would be preserved but it aint noahs ark so it doesnt matter probably just a boat shaped rock

I remember seeing something on Discovery About this, and about 2 people going up there or something, and they brought a piece of wood back. Supposively, the wood was dated to be very old. I dont know, the whole story of Noah's Ark seems odd too me, just for the simple fact that The boat itself would have taken forever to build, and then to bring 2 of every animal on the boat... comeon, how did they capture the elephants? Using string? One thing I dont like about the bible, is that so many things can be interpreted so many ways, and sometimes I think to myself, if it was all true, and god existed, wouldn't he want to give us some hard evidence and not make us rely on "faith". If there was hard evidence of god, and heaven, etc. I'm sure lots of the crime that happens now wouldn't happen, because people would know there is something after death. If god loves so much, Wouldn't he want us to know that he really does exist, give hard evidence for it, and if there is a hell, not risk a lot of people going too it just because he made them rely on faith?

Originally posted by dbates

Originally posted by Seapeople
What happened when they got off the boats, and the lions were all hungry and stuff. There were only two antelopes...what happens when they were done eating them?

Well, actually the story says (Genesis 7:2) that there were 7 of every clean animal, and 2 of every unclean animal. Possibly the lions ate other things, say all the dead stuff laying around after the flood.

So...

Tell me, where did the pug come from?