It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Noah's Ark Found?

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 07:13 AM
Bob Cornuke wrote a book, prior to this discovery, called 'The Lost Mountains of Noah.' I read it--only because my boyfriend's mother had it, and he read it...avidly, from start to finish he couldn't put it down...and he's not a reader at all--aside from the Godfather map to his playstation2 game.
So I was intrigued. It was a good book.

The man, Ed Davis, that said he saw this thing back in 1943, seemed to have been haunted by what he saw all of his life. But he never told anyone until a few years before he died, because he had really been ridiculed by his platoon mates when he returned from his outing to see it--a rigorous and exciting tale, in itself.

The book certainly seemed to indicate that there was good reason for searching in those mountains in Iran, from what the bible says and what Ed Davis said. I then believed, that if it had existed and was still around somewhere, it would certainly be far more plausible in Iran (Turkey I could never understand--it was desolate and barren and probably didn't even exist at the time this might have happened, anywhere from 7,000 to 10,000 years ago).

Anyway, here are some links and information I found on-line:


Cornuke trusts the Ed Davis eyewitness account over all others since Bob comes from a law enforcement background and Ed passed a lie detector test at which Bob was present. Some of the issues with Ed Davis being in Iran are listed above. Bob also believes that the Biblical texts of "rrt" (Urartu) along with ancient Assyrian texts tend to point toward Urartu being further east than traditionally thought.

Another interesting note is that a small portion of the kingdom of Urartu (mountains of Ararat) extended into what is now northwestern Iran and would include Kuh-e-Sahand and portions of Kuh-e-Sabalan as well as Mount Nisir (Gilgamesh Epic and today possibly Pir Omar Gudrun) and the Zograt mountains along the border of Iraq and Iran.

A few people favor the Dasht-e-Kavir Desert region of Iran for the following reasons:

  • There is a question about the Hebrew translations of Genesis 11.2. A few say that men moved FROM the east when they found a plain in Shinar while other translations indicate IN the east, and then built Babylon (Gen 11.2 From the East? by Stephen Clothier)
  • Some of the oldest pottery is found in Iran west of the Dasht-e-Kavir desert.
  • One of the oldest written languages Proto-Elamite is found in Iran
  • The most species of birds and lizards are found in Iran
  • Grains and domestic animals originated in Iran not Turkey
  • Shem's first born son Elam established Elam in Iran.
  • The Cambridge History of Iran Vol.1 1968

As far as what Genesis 11:2 says, I see no confusion about 'in' as opposed to 'from' the east--I don't rely on various English translations, preferring to the Hebrew instead. The verse is (with actual translation in bold and parenthesis):

And it came to pass (and it came to pass), as they journeyed (go forth) from the east (from eastward), that they found(find or meet) a plain(valley between mountains) in the land(land) of Shinar(a plain in Babylon); and they dwelt (settle)there (there or then).

Shane made some good points--especially about Gilgamesh's flood--no doubt the same story, just culturally altered as would be expected.

If the last ice age or something else, perhaps, as a result of the Younger-dryas period and/or transition to the Holocene caused

  • the waters to rise, perhaps up to 330 ft in some places
  • the atmosphere to grow quite a bit more humid with a period of rainfall due to the disruption in the ocean currents caused by the glacial run-off
  • increased significant tectonic activity including volcanic eruptions and some degree of continental plate activity
  • extinction event occurring in several phases, including the well-documented extinction of the larger animals such as the great cats and mastadons
  • the submersion of various cities and settlements along coast areas in the mid portions of the globe (which makes sense considering what areas would have been inhabitable during the ice age)

which was followed by, some time afterward, the 'sudden appearance' of seemingly impossibly advanced civilization in the area of Sumer and Egypt--somewhere around 6,000 years ago...

combined with the various archeological findings here and there over the globe of evidence of human settlements apparently existing aroung the 10,000 yrs ago mark on the timeline...

why wouldn't it be possible for such a tale as the flood (found in more than just the Hebrew and Sumerian lore--in fact many cultures have a 'flood story') to have been based not on fiction, but on fact?

There are three main linguistic roots that have been traced back to around the same time Sumer is known to have existed, and they correlate with the three cultural/racial groups that Shane spoke of; and there is far more in common between the various religions of that time (that we know of) than there is differences.

Forget all the christian hype about 'this will cause people to believe in God'--personally I think that's a silly pipe dream. Either people believe or they don't. And what they believe may or may not include catastrophism. Certainly it isn't going to prove fallacies such as evolution being totally unfounded (actually, I think it proves that natural selection is fact) or the earth being 6,000 years old or whatever. That's just nonsense. It's also egotistical and self-centered for christians, or anyone, to assume that the world only came into being full-grown and inhabitable--especially just for the purpose of humans and religious dogma...God surely had more exciting things to do long before we came on the's not 'all about us,' I don't think.

Here is some information concerning samples Cornuke brought back from this same site back in January--the last trip before this last one in which he made the discovery:

Braving treacherous climbing conditions, and a hostile political environment, Cornuke says he discovered evidence of an altar site, and a structure that geological experts theorize could have been “hand-hewed.”

He returned from Mt. Soleiman with numerous samples, photos, and video footage, and has chronicled the journey in a new book, Ark Fever (Tyndale House Publishers).

Testing of rock and shell samples were conducted by BETA Analytic Inc., the largest professional radiocarbon dating laboratory in the world, which routinely services world governments and major academic and historical institutions such as the Smithsonian Institute. Results of this carbon dating, which is still on-going, indicate the presence of abundant organic material consistent with coming from a quiescent deep-water environment – in layman’s terms, possibly from a world once immersed in water.

Evidence of petrified wood was also brought back, and a world-wide team of experts is studying all materials.

Evidently he's not afraid of some actual and legitimate scrutiny by the experts--and this article is dated January of this year (2006).

These are just my thoughts--I don't have any stake in whether anyone believes it to be what it is proposed, so I don't care either way. I do believe that a portion of skepticism is a healthy thing--and I think there is such a thing as being too skeptical--just as damaging as being not skeptical at all.

This might very well be a 'sign,' though--not about the bible but about the climate conditions on our globe in the present--such as the possible echo/repeat of such a situation that would have caused someone to build a really big boat to save himself and his family.

One more thing: the bible doesn't say, anywhere at all, that Noah took 2 of each and every animal existing at the time on board the ark. I don't know what could have wiped them out and then brought them back--I won't guess. But I do know that the multitude-of-animals-on-a-small-boat-is-impossible argument isn't a valid defense, because it's not even based on anything in the bible--poor translations and ignorance of the Hebrew originally used has led to this illogical idea.

The things Noah took on the ark appear to be the same 'beasts' that Ezekiel saw on the 'wheel within a wheel:' that is, except for one substitution:

Of fowls (of bird that flies) after their kind (portion), and of cattle (of cattle) after their kind (portion), of every creeping thing (whole reptile) of the earth (red soil) after his kind (portion), two (couple) of every shall (of whole) come (come) unto thee (toward), to keep alive. (keep/preserve/revive)
(Gen 6:20)

As for the likeness (resemblance) of their faces (face) they four (four) had the face (face) of a man (man of red—Adam), and the face (face) of a lion (young lion), on the (toward) right side (south): and they four (four) had the face(face) of an ox (bullock/cow) on (from) the left side (north); they four (four) also had the face face) of an eagle. (large bird)
(Eze 1:10)

Add Noah to the top one, and he becomes the ‘adam’ on board—and substitute the reptile for the young lion —and there certainly seems to be a connection.

I found a couple of better pictures, too, but I'll come back and post them.

posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 07:28 AM
I really think that Noah's ark would've been gone by now..considering the ravages of the world...

posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 08:43 AM
Okay, here are some pictures:

This one hasn't been posted, I don't think:

This one has been done, but look again:

Because, regarding it being basalt or not, basalt doesn't fracture at 90 degrees, but at 120 degrees.

As far as being petrified, it is entirely possible: given that petrification has been known to happen, albeit rarely, in less than 100 years, and we're looking at probably no less than 5,000 years (although I'd say more like 9 to 10). In addition, if this is what it is purported to be, the wood would have been soaked with water that had some degree of salinity, as opposed to fresh water, and the bitumen contained in the pitch could have contributed to the process. Being covered by snow all those years, with only occasional melt-offs of short duration would also add to the likelihood of petrification. And if so, the color of the petrified wood would be somewhat similar in color to the surrounding rocks; which it is, although not exactly.

This is a re-run, too, but I posted it again for the purpose of comparison of what is supposedly just a basalt dike--in the midst of a whole bunch of other, smaller, rock--seems a little odd to me, if it were a basalt dike (but I could be wrong about the basalt--the comparison seems incongruent, to me, though)

This one looks more like wood than any rock I've ever seen:

For an idea of size: if you look at this one (below) closely, you can see the person in the mid-to-lower left side of the photo, and there are about 3 people sitting down in the middle of the picture, just left of the 'ark' and at the lower left end of the little snow patch:

Even I can see tool marks all over the object in question, in some of the photos--not posted here.

Maybe if we call it 'Gilgamesh's Boat' we can have a more open minded discussion about it?

I'm perfectly willing to do that, just for some more objective input--it's not like I'm the kind of person who wants to force 'jebus-salvation' down anyone's throat just because there because there seems to be something odd in the mountains in Iran.

posted on Jul, 8 2006 @ 06:10 AM
Is this the same report that they had on internet news sources? It seems to me they have found the ARK several times, when are they actually you going show the real deal.

posted on Jul, 8 2006 @ 06:38 AM

Originally posted by queenannie38

This one looks more like wood than any rock I've ever seen:

Whereas I've seen hillsides covered in rock identical to that .....

posted on Jul, 8 2006 @ 07:26 AM

Originally posted by Essan
Whereas I've seen hillsides covered in rock identical to that .....

And Essan, I would think that would be Normal. Seeing a Hillside covered in this sort of rock.

But from what I see, this object, (since there is some question of what it may infact be), is foreign, to the area. Outside of the Photos shown so far, I have not seen, "A hillside" covered in it. The Rock/Ground Cover looks to be a completely different type of material.

From these photo, there seems to be "Something" here, that does not belong there.

This, along with the aspect that this seems to be centered solely in and around this object. Not scattered over a extremely large area, keeping in mind the 300 Cubits is somewhat large.



new topics

top topics
<< 1  2   >>

log in