Originally posted by john124
Yes, many if if if if if's.... unfortunately those are big if's and tests have revealed the shaping of the land to be a natural formation, with no evidence of petrified wood, and no evidence of the Ark story. Assuming anything would be as silly as assuming the story beforehand.

Indeed, which is the reason until then I will base my opinion around the facts that we have in front of eyes. Which is of course that religion is a powerful tool in this world.

I agree, assuming anything would be silly, however, tell that to the people who base their opinions on fabricated truths and a whole load of lies and what do you have?

Noah's ark was a spaceship. I doubt they will find that. The genetic code of each species was saved off, not the individual animals.

Originally posted by noobsauce13
Nice find S/F, but I can't conclude for myself that this is 100% legit. It looks like a natural formation maybe due to an ancient river and a deposit or something to that nature.

Sincerly,

Noobsauce13

yup...just think what they will find around MT. ST. HELENS 10,000 years from now...huge pieces of wood lined up in a row. there can be found petrified wood all over the world, it is quite common...and petrified dung?? c'mon...
the "rivets" are another story...these need further investigation

Going on the info from the source in the OP ,

this structure could easily have been a dwelling that has been encased in mud , not necessarly an ARK ,

if it was an ark and they had rivets , then why bother making anchors out of stone !

there just isnt enough hard evidence to make wild claims that its the ark !
they found evidence of petrified dung and antlers , so the ark was used as a settlement afterwards then ?

wouldnt noah have released the animals into the wild after the flood ? or did they die in the ark ? , how did he cage the animals or stop them from killing each other .
Furthermore the ark itself would have to be much bigger , say the size of a super tanker by todays standards to support

n Genesis 6:19-21, it is written:

And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female.

Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive.

And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them.
In Genesis 7:2-3, it is written:

Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.

Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth.

So yes that image of that formation on that hill in turkey , whilst it may look like a boat resting up there , it isnt any where near big enough to hold all of those animals and food and noah and his sons !

and did all those animals WILD animals just come willingly onto the boat , or was noah some sort of Steve Irwin who could tame wild animals !

do we need to go any further with this , or should I continue with more fantasy !

Originally posted by sphinx551
Seriously?
People really think that the Noah's Ark existed and the story of Noah's Flood is true?

[edit on 3-3-2010 by sphinx551]

Yes, people believe anything, never ceases to amaze me. I have a woman here that swears Michael Jackson is alive.

Excellent find. S&F. No matter how much evidence will be disclosed, they still will not believe. But it doesn't matter. The truth is the truth. That boat was huge.

this is proof? can someone explain it to me better then?

because all i see is landscape that has coincidently taken the resembling shape of a boat.

and not a particularly big boat either...not one that could house 2 of EVERY living thing on earth. and there were MUCH more species of creature back then before industrialisation took over.

just another hopeless bible basher

Excuse me if this has already been pointed out, I've only read 5 pages so far.

Having read all the links offered, emailed the Laboratory as one other person did, and read some other bits and pieces, I'm on the side of "This is not Noah's Ark".

Not many real scientists seem to agree with this story so far.

Sumerian texts are the origins of Genesis, this is a well recognised fact, although not well known outside of those who study and read on the topics.

So, in those texts it says God, the God Enki who created us, was told of a coming devastation in a Council of 12 (Gods) meeting which included Enki's father Anu.. the one most high. In this meeting he argued to tell his creations, Us, of the coming catastrophe.

But Enki's brother Enlil, who hated him with a vengeance, hated us humans and wanted us gone for good. This catastrophe would be good for him if the humans perished. He then argued not to tell the humans, and the Council of 12 upheld his proposal.

Enki was now made to take an Oath not to tell a human about the coming disaster. He retired to his apartments and called his most favoured human, Utnapishtim aka Noah and told him to sit behind a reed screen.. aka a Wall.

He then "told his woes" to the Wall, so that he would not break his Oath to the Council of 12. While doing so he put forward information on how to construct a Su-Le-Le (Underwater Boat) that was to be sealed with the naturally occuring bitumen of the area.

So, based on those instructions an Ark is more likely to be a cylinder shape, and since Enlil had perfected their study of Genetics it is more than likely that the two of every animal bit was more Genetic Material than living animals.

Just something to think about.

Now, in the Sumerian texts it also tells us that the last time The Gods, what we call "Elohim", were on our world they brought "scribes" from all continents and told them the tale of Genesis. Every detail was to be recorded, inlcuding how our Solar System was formed and by what forces, how each planet looks from up close as well as their Mass and Sizes.

More importantly, the recorded story told of the Genesis of Mankind. In good detail it shows 50,000 of our years in history starting with the question "What makes a thing in the likeness of its image" and finalising in the second human being model called The Adamma, or Adam which is the personal name we know it as. This is Homo Sapien Sapien, created from a mix of Upright Walking Man (Homo Erectus) and Anunnaki Genes. It is Us.

The recorded story every scribe was to take back to their own people so long ago also included the Deluge, or Biblical Flood, and its aftermath.

I think this is why each culture has the same core myths of the Flood, fighting sons of Gods, those same sons taking human women for physical pleasure, etc.

Thanks for letting me share.

Edit to fix Enki's name.

[edit on 4-3-2010 by Tayesin]

Oh, boy Noahs Ark!!!!
1) almost all ancient civilizations have a flood account...because it really happened.
2) The ark only had to hold two of every "kind" of animal. That usually is the equivilent of what science calls "family" of species. So Noah only had to take 2 DOGS. Not like 240.
3) As a Christian I am a little embarassed that in our preschools we paint pairs of smiling animals from Africa on the little ol' happy ark. All the while what people miss is that the flood was the most violent, deadly act of Gods wrath the world has ever seen. Praise be to God that he sent the Messiah!!
4) I think it is SOOOOO funny how some of you are talking about how this can't be the ark because it was so long ago and there would be nothing left. Yet, scientist have claimed to find dino bones that still have flesh on them which are supposed to be millions of years old. But you guys are right, a water treated wooden boat would never last 1000's of years.
5) Whether this is the ark or not, does not change the historicity of the flood.

I have no doubt that there was a ancient worlds flood some 12kish years ago. I have no doubt that it killed off alot of people and certainly warrants investigation and serious research as to what set it off.

My theory, a rather large comet came to earth, superheating the earth and making the sea rise considerably from the poles melting...causing much chaos and mayhem...nothing like a epic tsunami to freak out the natives.

Around the world at around the same time, religions discussed a massive flood...some blamed their Gods, some blamed devils, etc...the sphinx has water damage on it, theres alot of evidence from stories and some evidence of such a catastrophic event.

The problem is whenever you talk about a ancient world flood catastrophe, the religious nuts start talking about arks and all sorts and in essence cut the whole convo off into some religious nonsense chat verses a speculative discussion about what would cause floodings rapidly...be it comet or polar caps melting, etc...

Its like...religion was put on earth to dull our scientific understanding of events, not to substitute until we know better.

I dont pretend to understand what could cause these events...hell, the Eredu theory may end up being the right theory...one thing I do know however is that the longer we push any odd story in the domain of religion, the longer such events will remain unknown and not seriously looked at. If you truely believe this is some magical ark, then get some of the most skeptical scientists on earth over to take samples and either prove or disprove the claim. 30 years and no proper science done, sounds like someone is trying to hide something.