It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ark

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2005 @ 07:12 PM
link   
I have been wondering about have they found Noahs Ark. I heard about expeditions to find it. I am Christian and believe in it but have they found it. I f you could give me articles or perzonal ideas that would help Thanx




posted on May, 20 2005 @ 09:43 PM
link   
The supposed Ark found near Mt. Ararat turned out to be the remains of a wooden hut built on the site circa 6th century (carbon dating of the wood). Best guess is someone built the hut (chapel, church, inn?) on the legendary location to serve the pilgrims that started going there.

Most Biblical scholars now concede the flood was a regional catastrophic event. The ancient nomadic Semitic tribes that eventually became the Hebrews used the ancient story as a metaphor, using it in their folklore to illustrate and teach moral principles and cultural values. The details changed over time as necessary to fit the point of the story. The collection of the various folklore tales eventually coalesced into what is now known as the Old Testament.



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 10:05 PM
link   
If you want to find it, I would start looking for it in Ethiopia.

It's all in Ethiopia.




posted on May, 20 2005 @ 11:24 PM
link   
i once saw a show on this, and though i am Christian, i do not believe in the Noah ark story, i think its more of a story with a moral to it. first off, loading the animals 2x2 on the boat would take Noah 4,000 years going at 1 second a species, secondly, it would collapse after it set sail, it would be way to big, third, it cant flood the earth raining 40 days and 40 nights, it would give the earth about 17% more water but that’s still not 100%, and if it did, there would be so much hydrogen vapor in the air, it would kill us. We would more less drown by breathing. There are more if you’d like to argue about it but...


Schmidt1989



posted on May, 21 2005 @ 04:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Schmidt1989
i once saw a show on this, and though i am Christian, i do not believe in the Noah ark story, i think its more of a story with a moral to it. first off, loading the animals 2x2 on the boat would take Noah 4,000 years going at 1 second a species, secondly, it would collapse after it set sail, it would be way to big, third, it cant flood the earth raining 40 days and 40 nights, it would give the earth about 17% more water but that’s still not 100%, and if it did, there would be so much hydrogen vapor in the air, it would kill us. We would more less drown by breathing. There are more if you’d like to argue about it but...


Schmidt1989


good point Schmidt


you'll be telling us Santa Claus doesn't exist next (CONTAINS PLOT SPOILERS);

There are 2 billion children (persons under 18) in the world. Since Santa doesn't (appear) to handle Muslim, Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist children, that reduces the workload to 15% of the total, 378 million according to Population Reference Bureau. At an average census) rate of 3.5 children per household, that's 91.8 million homes. One presumes there's at least one good child in each.

Santa has 31 hours of Christmas to work with. This is due to the different time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming he travels east to west (which seems logical). This works out to 822.6 visits per second.

This is to say that for each Christian household with good children, Santa has .001 second to park, hop out of the sleigh, jump down the chimney, fill the stockings, distribute the remaining presents under the tree, eat whatever snacks have been left, get back up the chimney, get back into the sleigh and move on to the next house.

Assuming that each of these 91.8 million stops are evenly distributed around the earth (which, of course, we know to be false but for the purposes of our calculations we will accept), we are now talking about .78 miles per household, a total trip of 75.5 million miles; not counting stops to do what most of us must do at least once every 31 hours, plus feeding etc.

So Santa's sleigh must be moving at 650 miles per second, 3,000 times the speed of sound. For purposes of comparison, the fastest man-made vehicle on earth, the Ulysses space probe, moves at a poky 27.4 miles/second. A conventional reindeer can run, tops, 15 miles per hour.

The payload on the sleigh adds another interesting element. Assuming that each child gets nothing more than a medium-sized toy (say 2lb. in weight), the sleigh is carrying 321,300 tons, not counting Santa, who is invariably described as overweight. On land, conventional reindeer can pull no more than 300 lb. Even granting that "flying reindeer" could pull10 TIMES the normal amount; we cannot do the job with 8, or even 9 reindeer. We need 214,200. This increases the payload - not counting the weight of the sleigh - to 353,430 tons. This is four times the weight of the ocean-liner Queen Elizabeth.

353,000 tons travelling at 650 miles per second creates enormous air resistance. This will heat the reindeer up in the same fashion as a spacecraft re-entering the earth's atmosphere. The lead pair of reindeer will absorb 14.3 QUINTILLION joules of energy each per second; In short, they will burst into flame almost instantaneously, exposing the reindeer behind them, and create deafening sonic booms in their wake.

The entire reindeer team will be vaporised within .00426 of a second.

Meanwhile, Santa will be subjected to centrifugal forces 17,500.06 times greater than gravity. A 250lb Santa (seems ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the back of his sleigh by 4,315,015 lb. of force.

If Santa ever DID deliver presents on Christmas Eve, he'd be dead as soon as he started.



posted on May, 21 2005 @ 04:48 AM
link   
Noah's Ark hasn't been found, although many have searched for it. I've read that there is very good evidence that there was a massive flood in that part of the world, but it certainly didn't cover the whole planet. Although, if you were in an ark and you saw nothing but water in all directions for 40 days/nights, it is no stretch of the imagination to think that the whole planet was underwater, having no way of knowing it was just your little corner of the world. It's also possible that the stories were exaggerated over time. (it was this big... this big... THIS BIG!!!!) I'm a Christian, and I think that the Ark story is rooted in fact, but I wouldn't be surprised if one of the possibilities I suggested, or something similar, resulted in a slightly distorted version of events.

[edit on 21-5-2005 by DragonsDemesne]



posted on May, 21 2005 @ 05:38 AM
link   
Great question. Last I did investigation Knights Templer had four of them from the lower vaults in jeruslem beneath the temple mount and swindled the Arks' off to Scotland. Built a temple in roslynn and called it the Rosylnn Temple and burried the four Arks underneath the temple.

The other perhaps original is being held in a temple located in Ethiopia in another temple and guarded by a monk 24/7.
Another main man who researched all this seems to have been sillenced - Burgess Merideth, who did all the research

Dallas



posted on May, 21 2005 @ 08:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dallas

Great question. Last I did investigation Knights Templer had four of them...

Dallas


I think you mean the 'other Arks' that were supposed to hold the ten commandments - Moses' briefcases or whatever.


This is the floating one, Noah's boat and petting zoo.



posted on May, 21 2005 @ 08:32 AM
link   
For anyone interested in Noah's Ark, please research the "Ararat Anomaly" and perhaps check out this site:-

www.noahsarksearch.com...

It is a good starting point!

Regards,

Dobbie



posted on May, 21 2005 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Ive heard of a structure the kurdish rebels call 'the holy ark' on ararat.



posted on May, 21 2005 @ 04:43 PM
link   
If the Ark landed on Ararat (in the Caucaucus Mountain Range) by rights, it should have become nothing but scattered splinters by now. The Caucaucus Range is subject to every type of Weather condition..and it's Earthquake prone!



posted on May, 21 2005 @ 04:49 PM
link   
Noah's Ark has been discovered. You can read about it at the link and marvel at the pictures too.

Noah's Ark



posted on May, 21 2005 @ 04:58 PM
link   
One thing that supports a flood theory is the fact that most of the world's river deltas are only about 5000 years old.



posted on May, 21 2005 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by gothica91
I have been wondering about have they found Noahs Ark.

How can somethign that never existed be found???


I heard about expeditions to find it.

Most are either completely mistaken or down and out frauds.


dallas
ast I did investigation Knights Templer had four of them from the lower v

I beleive you and others are thinking of the Arc of the Covenant, not the Ark of Noah.


This is not the ark. Its beleived to be a mongolian fortification, apparently they used things of the same shape and ran part of that area.

These are not nails laid out in a pattern. They are naturally occuring iron containing concretions. Ron Wyatt is a fraud and Huckster.

That page also notes what is apparently an incorrect interpretation of some chinese characters.

It should also be noted that the structure depicted there is not capable of holding every animal, let alone every 'kind' of animal. Its also noteworthy that there is no evidence to suggest the migration of animals to the loading site and from the landing site. I mean, this suggests that kangaroos hoped from australia to the ark, and then back, in, what, a pair? Or are kangaroos kosher? It also suggests sloths made the journay, along with koalas, which only eat the eucalyptus tree.
Its also noteworthy that there was no global flood in the first place.



posted on May, 21 2005 @ 10:44 PM
link   
What convinces me that there was no global flood, and never will be, is that huge amounts of water would have to come from nowhere. To cover moutains would require huge increases in sea levels. So if there was a flood, it was localised



posted on May, 22 2005 @ 03:58 AM
link   
Not to debunk the mainstream Christian view, but to inform the curious.

The Sumerian epic of Gilgamesh tells the story of the ark pretty much as in Genesis, although written some 2,000 years earlier.

It may be related, as many Semites came from Sumer to dwell in Cannaan.

Woolley relates that, as written in early Sumerian archives, a regional flood did occur, which possibly wiped out a good portion of Semites living in the low lying areas of the mesopotamian delta.

The language of the Sumerians (as well as some of their myths and customs) was later absorbed by the Assyrio-Babylonians, a branch of which became Hebrew.



posted on May, 22 2005 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by dave_54


Most Biblical scholars now concede the flood was a regional catastrophic event.


This translates,

Most liberal weenies, which are not to be confused with bible believing christians, .....and put upon themselves the term 'biblical scholar", believe the flood was a regional catastrophic event.

I mean, c'mon. What is a biblical scholar? The bible makes it clear that it was a world wide event. So what is meant by biblical scholar? And how can anyone read that part and not understand that it says the entire world?

I dont mind that there are different views on if its real or not. But dont say that the 'opposition' now sees it your way.
Thats a flat out lie.

Gen 6:6 And the LORD was sorry that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart.
Gen 6:7 So the LORD said, "I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, man and animals and creeping things and birds of the heavens, for I am sorry that I have made them."


It doesnt say that he was sorry he made them in Turkey, or Iraq, or the Black Sea. It includes the whole group.


And God said to Noah, "I have determined to make an end of all flesh, for the earth is filled with violence through them. Behold, I will destroy them with the earth.

Yes..its the whole earth.

Biblical scholar my Balaams donkey



posted on May, 22 2005 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Jake1997
Gen 6:7 So the LORD said, "I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, man and animals and creeping things and birds of the heavens, for I am sorry that I have made them."


Man was not spead throughout the entire Earth. A global flood was not necessary to wipe out man.


How did Noah fit all the animals on the ark?

Noah's floating zoo(highly recommend reading)

Was the ark seaworthy?(short answer yes): www.theoutlaws.com...

A scale model of Noah's Ark was taken to a marine laboratory and subjected to the kinds of wave action Noah must have endured. The model sustained simulated 200-foot tidal waves, and it remained exceptionally seaworthy and stable. Furthermore, a professor of hydraulics from San Diego, Dr. Henry Morris, stated that the balance between the buoyant force and the gravitational force would be such that the Ark would right itself if it were tilted anywhere from 0-90 degrees. It would be practically impossible to capsize. Noah's Ark could have withstood the storm's fury.
link also goes into the flood story supposedly being a re-telling of gilgamesh

Not sure if they have found the ark or if they ever will. It was made out of wood after all, and when the waters receded they(noah&family) probably dismantled it(mostly anyway) to use the wood for building shelter and fire for heat and cooking and the like.



[edit on 22-5-2005 by Rren]



posted on May, 22 2005 @ 03:40 PM
link   
If the bible absolutely requires a literal global flood, then the bible is completely at odds with rationality and anything knowable, becuase there absolutely was never anything like a global flood.



posted on May, 22 2005 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
If the bible absolutely requires a literal global flood, then the bible is completely at odds with rationality and anything knowable, becuase there absolutely was never anything like a global flood.



I did this workup as part of a math paper once, but the original is long gone. I'll let someone else re-create the numbers.

The Biblical flood covered to Earth to a depth of 20 feet. Everest is 29,028 feet (?). It is still rising, so circa 5,000 BC it was a bit lower. An internet search will reveal it's approximate height then. From its previous height add 20 feet and calculate the volume of that sphere of water. Subtract from that the volume of the earth. That is the amount of water that must be accounted for. If that volume of water simply percolated into the earth the entire mass of the earth is about 1/4 water (I don't remember the exact percentage -- someone run these numbers, OK?). We know there is not that much water contained inside the Earth either as groundwater or locked up in geologic hydrates. Remember this 'missing' water is in addition to the oceans and all other terrestial water.

So where is this missing mass of water? Did God simply make it 'vanish'? That is a rather weak knee-jerk answer.



Too many Christians are missing the meaning of the Bible. The Book is not about facts or an accurate depiction of history, although they are many historical references contained in the pages. It is about morals, ethics, theology, and the relationship between God and man. Many of the stories are metaphors and allegories used to illustrate the meanings. They are not now and never were intended to be factually accurate. It's the principles contained in the stories that are Truth, not the details. Some contemporary Christians are spending so much energy arguing the trivia and the absolute factualness of every word and phrase they have become oblivious to what the Bible actually teaches. Once I realized this my faith and appreciation deepened and I finally understood what the Bible was really saying. It all made sense. I became a better Christian for it.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join