You'll note that prior to CNN, and in the millennia past, folks spoke of their local history. Myths are stories to explain the past, and while they get stretched a bit sometimes, there are many myths that have proven to be very true.

If one will consider another possibility. A pole shift, or other geological event that are documented in the geology of our world, could it be possible that this pole shift was anticipated, and an ark was built.

Keep in mind that our oceans are currently traveling close to 1,000 mile per hour at the equator, and if there were a crustal displacement or pole shift, then these masses of water would have wanted to continue in the same direction already traveling in, and would of course, wash over continents.

Charles Hapsgood, Immanuel Velikovsky, and others indicate the geological evidence that supports this event in the past.

Where the Ark came to rest us as yet unproven. A crustal displacement would only have required animals in the immediate region - at least I would assume. No penguins. No polar bears. Any God strong and powerful enough as the God of Noah would have provided for these difficult to reach areas.

So. Where is it?

A lot of speculation. A lot of argument. A lot of hope.

But the thing is, there just may be remains of the Ark somewhere, especially if it truly came to rest on some of the higher peaks, where normal oxidation and deterioration would be significantly slowed.

A fascinating story.

deleted

[edit on 16-12-2008 by jsobecky]

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by Quiintus
Please only people that know something about this.

I know that the story of Noahs Ark is absolutely impossible.
It is not possible scientifically - or genetically - to have happened.

Why is it not possible scientifically? I know that boat makers have said it is completely possible to make so big a wood boat. They add that a few very large boats, close to the size of Noah's Ark have been excavated in China. The large wood boats need a baffle of sorts, so Noah's wood have needed it, for the smell alone.

There WAS a big flood. There were survivors. But there was no 'one big boat' that held a family of 6 reproductive humans and a bunch of animals.

Well as i have told you before, you should READ IT before you comment! You look completely silly when you don't even know the story...
There was more than 6 reproducing humans on the Ark...

If kangaroos and penguins lived on or near Mt. Ararat we could talk.
Otherwise - it's just a myth. A myth based upon the Summerian legends.

Did clams live on top of the mountains, that is where they are often found? You look silly again when you talk about Gilgamesh Epic, the only thing we know about it is that it was written before Moses wrote the first five books. It is pretty well known fact that a lot of cultures kept ORAL Traditions that were passed down. We still have those today, Atlantis, and Dragons, and flood stories in 270 cultures, and Troy (which people said was a myth, was FOUND). You see Moses was more of an Editor on the book of Genesis according to most Biblical Scholars, but hey it is clear you haven't read it anyways, so you stick with your myth ideas if you like...

Edited to add this Video:

Google Video Link

[edit on 12/16/2008 by theindependentjournal]

Originally posted by Lasheic


Further - if Noah's Ark did not happen as was told in the bible, then you're really not validating the bible are you?

I read the whole thread up until your post and did not see anyone talking about validating the Bible. Only talking about how the Noah's Ark story is based on an actual event that did happen and an actual boat that was built, and about where that boat landed.

I have a hypothesis.

Was Noah's Arc the only Arc.

The Deluge is similar in story but has more differences than similarities with the genesis record.

Could it be that there were numerous "arcs" crafted for the "great flood" from different parts of the world.

It is possible that the entire "inhabited" planet was flooded and that there were many "Noah's" given the same instructions.

Originally posted by Mikeraphone

Originally posted by Lasheic


Further - if Noah's Ark did not happen as was told in the bible, then you're really not validating the bible are you?

I read the whole thread up until your post and did not see anyone talking about validating the Bible. Only talking about how the Noah's Ark story is based on an actual event that did happen and an actual boat that was built, and about where that boat landed.

Then why even bring Noah's Ark into the equation? It should be a minor footnote, along with the Sumerian myths. Why not try to validate the concept without invoking the biblical story, but only using the biblical story as a reference.

The impression I get is that the OP is trying to validate the Noah's Ark story, when the actuality of the event (if it can be substantiated to have happened) likely doesn't resemble the Noah's Ark myth in any but the largest and most broad details. It may be a minor matter of degrees, but using the starting point he did skews the validity of any research he does (imo) with an unnecessary and unneeded bias.

Howdy Dooper

Keep in mind that our oceans are currently traveling close to 1,000 mile per hour at the equator, and if there were a crustal displacement or pole shift, then these masses of water would have wanted to continue in the same direction already traveling in, and would of course, wash over continents.

1. The land is also moving at that speed, you might want to invest some time in reading about a little thing known as angular momentum which you'd have to contend with there.

2. The idea is that somehow the Earth's crust is an incredibly strong, single unit floating on an essentially frictionless surface, and that some force can somehow rapidly change the rotation or angle of rotation of the entire crust as a unit, but somehow not the core, mantle or oceans. You need a lot of energy, so much so you'd probably melt the mantle.

3. If the plates shifted so would the ocean bottoms.

Originally posted by Lasheic

Originally posted by Mikeraphone

Originally posted by Lasheic


Further - if Noah's Ark did not happen as was told in the bible, then you're really not validating the bible are you?

I read the whole thread up until your post and did not see anyone talking about validating the Bible. Only talking about how the Noah's Ark story is based on an actual event that did happen and an actual boat that was built, and about where that boat landed.

Then why even bring Noah's Ark into the equation? It should be a minor footnote, along with the Sumerian myths. Why not try to validate the concept without invoking the biblical story, but only using the biblical story as a reference.

The impression I get is that the OP is trying to validate the Noah's Ark story, when the actuality of the event (if it can be substantiated to have happened) likely doesn't resemble the Noah's Ark myth in any but the largest and most broad details. It may be a minor matter of degrees, but using the starting point he did skews the validity of any research he does (imo) with an unnecessary and unneeded bias.

Read the different versions of the stories then tell me they aren't similar. The oldest culture is the one that matters the most in this discussion. The Bible is valid to this conversation cos it provides us with plenty of garbled information about the real ark but the further back we go the closer to the truth we get. Until an older version is found then the Sumerian one is it.

Because Rohl and other Scholars have agreed. That it's just lost in translation. The bible is the same story but condensed/misunderstood/misunderstood and possibly purposely manipulated by people of those times for their own agenda's. The fact that the respective scholars in the different fields are combining the pieces of the puzzle together to make a more coherent picture is the main point. You can't ignore Rohls work cos he teamed up with all others experts like him self but in there own fields.

The name Noah, Nuh, Atrahasis, Ziusudra, Utnapishtimin all mean the same thing. That's how we know they are the same person and also because most of those civilizations sprung near or on top of each other Sumeria, Akkad, Babylon, Iraq. It's no different to Matthew/Matthias in English which derived from the Hebrew Matithyah, composed from matath "gift,"" and Yah, abbreviation of Yahweh "God," and therefore means "gift of God." Find out the translation for Matthew in all the different languages then argue with us that they are not the same name. They are still the same name no matter how strange they sound in other languages.

Unless all the characters that built boats around the world all had the same name LOL? No I think what you're saying doesn't make sense. The second father of the human civilization after Adam was this person Ziusudra, Noah, Nuh, Atrahasis, Ziusudra, Utnapishtimin, who was the illegitimate child of Enki. Do some reading and you'll realize that's why he was saved.

Now the bible states that God was called Yahweh of just so happens to be Enki/Ea/Yahweh ect.... Same explanation as above. They can trace the origin of words my friend.

Well the post I was responding too got deleted so I remove mine also!

[edit on 19/12/08 by Hanslune]

OK.

Last time I'm going to say this. So let's pay attention this time...

The personalities stay out of the conversation from here on in.

Thanks so much...

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
Why is it not possible scientifically? I know that boat makers have said it is completely possible to make so big a wood boat.

I'm not talking about the boat. I'm talking about the fact that more than just two animals are needed for their species to continue in a healthy manner. AND the fact that many animals are not found in that part of the world. The 'survivors' who came off the ark wouldn't have been able to survive in that part of the world let alone make it back to the parts they are in now. Kangaroos for example. Polar bears are another. Penguins are another.

you should READ IT before you comment!

Oh good Lord! I've definately read both the Christian version AND the Summerian version of this story.

You look completely silly

ATS 101 - refresher - no name calling and stick to the topic.

There was more than 6 reproducing humans on the Ark...

Noah's three sons and their three wives. Noah and his wife were supposedly hundreds of years old and definately past procreation age. This is not a big enough genetic pool for humans to have continued on in a healthy manner - DNA wise - let alone explained the different white, black, and asian races throughout the world.

You look silly again when you talk about Gilgamesh Epic,

1 - You look silly continually resorting to calling people names.
2 - The Gilgamesh Epic is definately part of the 'Noah's Ark' myth.

it is clear you haven't read it anyways,

OY

immediate edit to fix quote



[edit on 12/19/2008 by FlyersFan]

As my counterpart has said, let's keep this civil, and on topic.

As some of you know, I will not hesitate to use stern measures to make sure that the policy of staying on topic, without resorting to ridicule, is followed to the letter.

This thread will NOT spiral out of control.

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
flood stories in 270 cultures,

No kidding. I already said that there was a world wide flood.
There is plenty of evidence of that. However, it is impossible
for just one boat of 3 pair of reproductive humans along with 2 of
every kind of animal to have been the only survivors. Science
says so.

World wide Flood ... yes.
Noah's Ark story ... myth.

Ask a geologist about it and see what they say, History Channel and Discovery Channel have portrayed many of these peoples in their shows on the Ark.

Hans: Read a basic book of geology, no global biblical flood, we've known that for 150 years

Now they won't agree on HOW the worldwide flood happened just that it did, some say meteorite some say other things but they all agree that the whole of the world was under water.

Hans: You are confusing limited regional floods as proof of a biblical world wide deluge, that didn't happen

This explains quite a few anomalies they find in nature.

Hans: not really

Clams on top of mountains, some petrified some not = Worldwide Flood

Hans: Fossils on top of mountains. Oh and if they were clams how did they grow to that size in the limited time of the flood?

Black Sea ancient beaches and communities 150 meters lower than today's shoreline = Worldwide Flood

Hans: Misrepresentation of the flooding of black sea, again no evidence of a biblical world wide deluge

The Grand Canyon's Colorado River is hundreds of feet lower than the top of the canyon's highest point and they all know that rivers don't flow UPHILL = Worldwide Flood.

Hans: Look up land rise and tectonics plates and how mountains rise - look at the rivers in the Alleganies. And you have agreat Creationist day yourself.