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.

 

Lynchburg man looking for Noah's Ark

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Lynchburg man looking for Noah's Ark


www.newsadvance.com

The team hypothesizes that the ark is preserved in several pieces beneath a glacier on the mountain, and every so often the glacier recedes, exposing part of the vessel.

They found the spot, Price said, but it now is covered by an estimated 60-foot-deep pile of boulders. Price believes the landslide may have resulted from attacks against Kurdish rebels on the mountain, or perhaps from explosives that were set off to cover up the ark.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 02:31 PM
link   
Not being much of a believer in the bible myself, would a find such as this change the way people feel about the ancient texts?

Of course if you go to the side of the theory that it was covered up by a landslide to stop the discovery of the ark.. why would anyone want to do that?

You would think that history.. no matter if you agree with it or not.. is something we all should experience and try to garner information from.

It is an interesting story, no matter what you believe to be true concerning the bible.

www.newsadvance.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Flood myths exist in other religions too, and just as cultural myths that pre-date Christianity and the bible.

There might have been some event that had some parallels with these myths, but anyone who believes in it literally is deluded.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 02:42 PM
link   
I totally get what you are saying, and agree.

But you know as well as I do, that IF a boat of some kind was found on that mountain.. it would automatically be considered the ark by every christian in the world. (exaggeration)

They NEED it to be real too badly.

[edit on 2-2-2009 by TwiTcHomatic]



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by TwiTcHomatic
But you know as well as I do, that IF a boat of some kind was found on that mountain.. it would automatically be considered the ark by every christian in the world. (exaggeration)

They NEED it to be real too badly.


They won't find one, and even if they did it wouldn't mean a thing without any further objective research.

Of course this wouldn't stop people from believing it was Noah's Ark, but look at this way: nothing stops people from seeing Jesus in grilled cheese anyway.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 04:35 PM
link   
As a Christian, personally I do not believe Noah's Ark will ever be found. Neither will the Ark of the Covenant. Per descriptions in the Bible, they were both made from wood and I very seriously doubt anything is left of either one of them. I suppose they could have been fossilized or petrified, but I doubt it. Most likely they disintegrated long ago and there is nothing left to find.
There are several flood stories from several cultures throughout the world. Did the whole world flood or not? Was the Ark or boat or whatever piloted by Noah or Gilgamesh or one of the many others named? Are all of the names just the same name in different languages? The one thing that does matter is how widespread the story is. It likely was based on some portion of truth that was told through generations of spoken history throughout the world.
Contrary to what you say, Twitch, I do not need the Ark to be found. I don't believe it exists anymore. If a boat was found and the claim was made that it was the Ark, I would be very doubtful of the claim. I also believe the Shroud of Turin is not what so many seem to think it is. I think it is just the burial cloth of some regular guy. And, Converge, people that see Jesus or the virgin Mary in their grilled cheese or anywhere else for that matter probably need to be medicated. Believing that garbage is exactly the same mentality as someone who is "in contact with aliens" or who can "project themselves astrally" and so forth. There are many so called "Christians" who are no more than sheep and allow themselves to believe anything their cultlike pastor tells them. There are a few of us, however, that are quite intelligent and do not need a preacher to spoon feed us religious dogma and instead find the truth for ourselves.
For me, it is like the old saying about atheism:
"The belief that there was nothing and then nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. makes perfect sense."
So, in the same way that you believe Christians are foolish for their beliefs, a rational, thinking Christian feels that the Darwinian monkey descendents are just as foolish. No matter how you spin it, everything physical had to have a beginning, which must have been created.

[edit on 2-2-2009 by tallcool1] spelling



[edit on 2-2-2009 by tallcool1]



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by tallcool1
So, in the same way that you believe Christians are foolish for their beliefs


Yes, I do, but don't you also?


And, Converge, people that see Jesus or the virgin Mary in their grilled cheese or anywhere else for that matter probably need to be medicated. Believing that garbage is exactly the same mentality as someone who is "in contact with aliens" or who can "project themselves astrally" and so forth. There are many so called "Christians" who are no more than sheep and allow themselves to believe anything their cultlike pastor tells them.


At least you sound like you do


Or aren't those people "real christians"? I bet they would say the same about you.



a rational, thinking Christian feels that the Darwinian monkey descendents are just as foolish.


A rational thinking person would have known the difference between Darwin's Theory of Evolution and Evolution itself.

Science doesn't claim to know how man came to be, it tries to find out based on the factual observable evidence. I think it's far more humbler than to claim to know for sure that man was created on the 6th day.



For me, it is like the old saying about atheism:
"The belief that there was nothing and then nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. makes perfect sense."


Again, a rational thinking intelligent man would understand that Darwin's Theory of Evolution doesn't describe Evolution has 'random' or "magically rearranging" processes, but the exact contrary to random.

Oh and by the way, dinosaurs came long after the "self-replicating bits"
After those self-replicating bits evolved into complex cellular organisms.



No matter how you spin it, everything physical had to have a beginning, which must have been created.


If everything has to be created, who created the creator?



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 05:02 PM
link   
At most they'll find some peices of wood. Which they'll claim is from the ark, and based off of the last peice of wood, even if it's to old or young to be from the story, it'll be claimed as being from the ark.
And it'll be a conspiracy by the gubermints that's suppressing it.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 05:07 PM
link   
Ive seen documentarys on this, on history channel over the years...i am thinking this is the same boat...up on MT. Cyanide..Ive seen the pics, from history channel, ariel photos showing what appears to be a chunk of wood sticking out of the moutnain, near its peak. One guy did in fact, bring a piece of the wood abck for carbon dating..don't remember what the facts were. NO one else went up thier, becasue its dangerous, of course....
This should be exciting..i Don/t see how boulders would fall on this wood, from humans fighting? Dont make sense. It is possible, galceir ice casued the rocks to fall thier or broguht them thier, but as for human intervention? Sounds like a cover up..



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Another user pointed out that Apollo 15 astronaut Jim Irwin also searched for Noah's Ark...

www.space.com...

"Apollo 15 moonwalker James Irwin was repeatedly drawn to Mount Ararat in hopes of finding Ark wreckage. Through his High Flight Foundation, a non-profit evangelical organization based in Colorado Springs, the former astronaut made six treks to Mount Ararat in an unsuccessful quest to find remains of the ark. "

"Irwin's last expedition in 1990 ran into trouble. Turkish police detained him following allegations that he engaged in spying while looking for the Ark. Since 1991, the mountain has been closed due to Turkish military operations against Kurdish rebels in the area."



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 05:27 PM
link   
Thats right! It wa Mt. Ararat, not cyanide...my bad



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 09:04 PM
link   
reply to post by tallcool1
 


I see the Ark story not only of a report, but also an allegory. Many times God comes to us and says, make ye a vehicle, as the floods they are a coming, and you need to be prepared to ride them out.


If we are wise and hearken to the sound exhorting us to prepare, then we have a chance of sidestepping the same calamities that will befall the rest of mankind.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 09:07 PM
link   
In case you haven’t seen Ron Wyatt’s claim to have found the Ark.

www.wyattmuseum.com...

I find it interesting, but not fully convincing.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 12:11 PM
link   
"Yes, I do, but don't you also? "

Do I believe Christians are foolish for their beliefs? No. I think some are more easily mis-lead into dogmatic beliefs that have no Biblical founding, but I do not believe Christians are foolish.

"At least you sound like you do
Or aren't those people "real christians"? I bet they would say the same about you."

I sound like I do what? Yes I am sure they would say the same about me. I personally am not bothered by the fact that some people find my beliefs stupid, but I will still try to intelligently debate them and i will try to point out to other Christians that some of the dogma they believe in was invented by the church. I should not have made the comment about them needing to be medicated though. For that I am sorry and I was wrong.

"A rational thinking person would have known the difference between Darwin's Theory of Evolution and Evolution itself. "

I was merely trying to illustrate a point without derailing this thread too far and getting into a discussion about whether all life on earth came from magical prokaryotes or a Divine spark.

"Science doesn't claim to know how man came to be, it tries to find out based on the factual observable evidence. I think it's far more humbler than to claim to know for sure that man was created on the 6th day."

Science mocks those who do not believe in their theories of their interpretation of "observable evidence". And I never claimed to know for sure that man was created on the 6th day. One day to God could be thousands/millions/billions of years to man. Personally, I think that the creation story is a combination of truth and parable, so I am not one of the young earth believers.

"Again, a rational thinking intelligent man would understand that Darwin's Theory of Evolution doesn't describe Evolution has 'random' or "magically rearranging" processes, but the exact contrary to random.
Oh and by the way, dinosaurs came long after the "self-replicating bits" After those self-replicating bits evolved into complex cellular organisms."

Again, just illustrating a point since this is a thread about the Ark and not a debate about creation/evolution. Point being that both evolution and creation at the extremely condensed level are basically life from lifelessness. Creation beliefs say that God created life. Evolution has a few different theories that are invented every time a previous theory is disproved or falls from favor. Both beliefs take an equal amount of faith.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 12:16 PM
link   
I think we are basically on the same page here. My original point is that I personally don't believe the Ark will ever be found. If it did exist, it doesn't now and if it is an allegorical story, then it most certainly doesn't exist.

[edit on 3-2-2009 by tallcool1] Edited to add that this is a reply to HunkaHunka

[edit on 3-2-2009 by tallcool1]



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 12:28 PM
link   
I hope they find a spaceship the one which brough life from mars to earth when a disaster of epic proportions occured which made mars no longer habitible for our ancestors .
then the bible has some truth .



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Price estimated that the team needs to raise about $60,000 to pay for permission to use the site, to buy the necessary machinery and to fund about two months of work on location.


'Permission' is sometimes synonymous with bribes. If a gentleman approached a local leader or intermediary of a poor region with questions about the Ark, of course someone will answer him. Any Westerner that has traveled through poor or 3rd World regions will understand this. "Yeah true, but this man told me about playing on the actual Ark itself when he was a boy. He actually told me himself. Took me to the area and everything!"

A lot of archaeological finds have been prompted by local myths and I accept it *may* be true. At the core of this story, however, is a tale told by a man and no indicative evidence whatsoever. The recession, movement and growth of glaciers tend to be emphatically destructive. If the Ark is at the base of the glacier and allegedly covered and revealed over the millenia, it would likely be degraded beyond recognition.

Until the Ark or the Yeti is discovered a lot of 'guides', 'wise men' and savvy locals will continue to take the money from people that are hugely wealthy by comparison. Who can blame them? Discovering any ancient structures is excellent news and adds more to our history. I hope he does find something, but he's not the first person to think he's found Noah's Ark.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by tallcool1
Creation beliefs say that God created life. Evolution has a few different theories


See, this is what I was talking about...

Evolution "doesn't have a few different theories". Theories of Evolution and Evolution are two different things!

Evolution in the sense of genetic variation and adaptation along the generations exists, it is a proven fact, not a 'theory'. Scientific theories of Evolution try to explain how these processes occur and what causes them. Darwin's Theory of Evolution happens to be one of those theories.



that are invented every time a previous theory is disproved or falls from favor. Both beliefs take an equal amount of faith.


Perhaps this concept of 'disproving' a theory is somewhat confusing to you, but it's simply a reflection of our continuous research and understanding of our world, but also, and most importantly, it's a sign that science and scientific theories have absolutely nothing to do with faith.

Theories are disproved because of evidence (to the contrary), and are the discredited if they do not correctly account for all observable evidence of a certain phenomenon, or can't (successfully) predict future occurrences or observations.

It's exactly because faith plays no part in science (or scientific theories) that a theory is disproved or discredited. The success and quality of a theory is based on factual evidence, and predictions, not faith.

Darwin's Theory of Evolution addresses the observable and available evidence. Creationism on the other hand, has nothing on it's side besides the belief that a higher entity created life. No evidence, no data.

Saying that Creationism and the Theory of Evolution require the same amount of belief is, honestly, very ignorant and shows how oblivious some people are to what Evolution, Darwin's Theory, and science really is (about).

[edit on 3-2-2009 by converge]



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by converge
Flood myths exist in other religions too, and just as cultural myths that pre-date Christianity and the bible.

There might have been some event that had some parallels with these myths, but anyone who believes in it literally is deluded.



I agree completely. In fact I am convinced that if someone spent the time to trace the flood myth back to its root, (most likely in Africa way back at a time when humans had not yet begun to move around the planet) you might even find evidence of a local flood that covered the entirety of their territory. (their world)

But it certainly wouldnt be in the middle east. The flood story predates that, and IF it is a remnant of an actual event, that event would mostly likely have been a local flood that occurred in Africa, before the people began moving out of Africa judging by the way the story is spread geographically. We know there hasnt been a global flood in the time frame that say, Native Americans have lived in the Americas, therefore the story migrated with them.

.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 03:18 PM
link   
Converge, this will be the last post for me about your faith in evolution, evolutionary theory, darwinism, etc. that you want to split hairs about. You either: a) know what I am trying to say, but just want to argue verbage in some desperate attempt to feel superior or, b) have made up your mind about your belief system and only pay attention to things that agree with your pre-formed opinion.
I do believe that small evolutionary changes do occur within a species to adapt to environmental changes and so forth, but to believe that all life on earth came from the same prokaryotes is an unprovable theory requiring faith in the interpretation of some scientists. Many scientists believe otherwise.
So call me ignorant or call me names if it makes you feel better about yourself. No matter how you want to argue about the words I choose to use that seem to annoy you, you even admit that science disproves previously held theories with new evidence. Well, those previous theories had factual evidence as well didn't they? And if something is found that completely goes against all current scientific "facts", it is conveniently discarded. Try googling "ooparts" for example. But now I am just as guilty of derailing this thread as you are. You may have the last word in this thread, or call me ignorant again or whatever you need to. I will only respond about Noah's Ark or the other flood stories in this thread. Start another thread about evolution, evolutionary theory, Darwinism, your irritation at the stupidity of those of us who believe in God and I will respond there. No offense, just this is not the thread for this discussion.

Sorry OP for my part in derailing your thread.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join