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.


Found! Noah's Ark - 4000m Up Mt Ararat

page: 9
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 08:38 PM
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand

Proof? Keep dreaming. You're into unusual and vivid dreams.

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 08:49 PM
Yeah, I saw that on "the Drudge report" this morning an clicked the link to the "the SUN" I read it and then went to page 3.

[edit on 27-4-2010 by RUFFREADY]

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 08:57 PM
reply to post by acrux

could this just as well be an ark of Gilgamesh??

or any of the other 800 flood stories around the globe...

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 09:03 PM

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand

Proof? Keep dreaming. You're into unusual and vivid dreams.

I was referring to your comments about the maya and the boat found in kufu pyramid. What were you talking about, perhaps I misunderstood you.

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 09:05 PM
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand

The boat was not in the pyramid as you stated. The Mayan flood story is not a flood of water and it does not kill off everyone.

Your claims are a bit off the mark.

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 09:10 PM

Originally posted by rapunzel222
i think they really found it this time. what else could it be?

even has some hay and ropes left inside...

Well, it could be a monastery, temple, or dwelling place of some wealthy nobleman. If you've ever been to Turkey, you know it's FULL of archeological things.

I rode horses in central Turkey with some people and we stopped for a rest. We were walking around on a hill covered in pottery shards. I remember thinking that I hoped I wasn't crushing anything important! I asked the Turkish guy who was with us what this site was and he said he didn't know. Crunch, crunch, crunch....

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 09:11 PM

Originally posted by saabster5
Oh, sorry for misunderstanding your view. I concur with you that there has been changes about us throughout the last 10,000 years, but what I find hard to believe is that there was a localized water event in the area of Ararat that left a wooden structure 13,000 ft above sea level. The evidence just doesn't support there being that much water in the localized area.

I'm going along the direction of some massive land shifts (greater than a typical earth quake) that caused huge waves washing across large areas of land within the last 10,000 years.

What I'm trying to say is that in order for a wooden structure of that dimension to "come to a rest" where it did, you would either need water to run uphill and help the wooden structure "float" up to that location, or you would need 13,000 ft of water in the surrounding areas to get the boat to that location. And through science I know that both of these scenarios are not possible of having taken place.

Though I'm not a true believer in a Noah like ark 13k feet up on a mountain, I would entertain the thought of some massive waves that could push wood rather high up. Kind of like whale bones found 1300 feet above sea level in the middle of America, or massive graves of bones wedge in fissures very high up with many extinct species mixed with human evidence. Also evidence of erratic boulders that were move in all direction long distance…uphill into the mountains. All suggesting being accomplished by massive waves of water…like what the human race would call the “great flood” or other like names around the world.

I'm just saying, there has been no evidence that the water tables on this globe have reached 13,000 ft above where they are currently at today.

How about waves of water miles high? Would explain much, and short duration as it retreated.

And yes I am aware that million year old fossils have been found around Mt Everest and other tall mountain ranges, but all that proves is that plate tectonics is real, and that areas that were under the ocean, can, over time, be pushed up to giant heights. I know this because I live in a region where there are countless fossils being found, in fact I'm literally miles away from a place that is dubbed the Fossil Capital of the World. And I live at an elevation of 7,000 ft above sea level. But these ancient oceans where I live are from millions and millions of years ago. Back when dinosaurs were roaming the earth.

As I said there are a lot of non fossil bones in the wrong places, massive extinction of many of these animals and also mass extinction of marine life too...all within 10,000 years.

But then again, like I said in my original post, my tiny insignificant brain has a tough time wrapping itself around a ship being found at 13,000 ft above sea level from a timeline that is less than 5,000 years old.

Well mine too...hehe

[edit on 27-4-2010 by Xtrozero]

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 09:12 PM
Well I wrote a thread here a while back. It may open many eyes.

Worth reading IMHO. Flood? Myths?
Origins of Atlantis/Lemuria Myths Part-1

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 09:18 PM
well Noah's Ark ending up at 4000m Up a Mountain makes the story even more interesting.

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 09:23 PM

Originally posted by Xtrozero

Originally posted by sirnex
Low oxygen and cold temperatures. Nor does the site the OP links to provide any visual evidence that this wooden structure is a boat. Still, even with the low oxygen and cold temperatures, there would NOT be FRESH hay existing in the structure. It screams of hoax, especially with the fresh brand spanking newly harvested hay. That and after over 4,000 years the floor planks would still have oxidized and deteriorated enough to be brittle to a point where one shouldn't be able walk and bang on as if 'proving' it's made of wood.

True and I said it was interesting only...hehe. With the wave of ice being melted and glaciers retreating if that wood was embedded in ice all that time it would still be in pretty good shape.

I agree, the wood *might* be somewhat in good shape, but there wouldn't be any freshly harvested hay after almost 5,000 years. The stuff is in a position as if it was put there yesterday, something that shouldn't happen with all the pressure of a glacier on top of it. It should be flattened and compacted down, unless our little man Noah there suffered a flash freeze, which would cast doubt into his little family there restarting humanity since they were the sole survivors of the flood. If the hay got flash frozen, then so did everything aboard that boat.

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 09:24 PM
As most of us already know, the biblical recounting of Noah's Ark is just a verbatim regurgitation of the Sumerian king Ziusudra which comes to us on cuneiform tablets that far precede the bible.

Just for the record, I'm not a Christian but if parts of the bible turn out to have used true historical references such as the borrowing of the Sumerian flood account that praised Ziusurdra's building of the Ark than so be it.

This looks like the best evidence that I've seen yet. There is by far much more evidence in this one place than has ever been offered to the best of my knowledge. If further excavation turns up the authentic hull of a ship I think it will become time for the debunkers to get out their humble pie.

To the atheist/debunker/or whatever that this potential evidence exposes, I caution you not to become stricken with anxiety if it truly turns out to be the case here. This find will only prove that the Sumerians weren't blowing smoke up everyone's ass and that we need to take ancient sources a little more seriously than we've done in the past and not just cast them aside as fantastical myths which seems to be the usual academic knee jerk reaction to everything that does not fit their modern day theoretical paradigm.

The sad reality is though, should a truly large ship with stalls for animals be found, most debunkers will only try to claim that it was intended for something else, or anything else but what the Sumerian/Akadian/Babalonian/Levite accounts claimed. In other words they will fight to the bitter end to defend their own belief systems. Rigid minds always do this.

It would not hurt my feelings or threaten me for one second if it turns out to be true. I know it might piss off some modern day historians though which might just be a good thing.

[edit on 27-4-2010 by warequalsmurder]

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 09:25 PM

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand

Proof? Keep dreaming. You're into unusual and vivid dreams.

You had stated that the Maya account was from popol vuh. You were correct. What does that have to do with the flood story?

You had stated that the boat was not found in kufu's pyramid. These pits are part of the pyramid, but I should of said that, so I agree. Much of the shells of the pyramids are disassembled.

These are life boats...hence crossing over.

There are three boat-shaped pits around the pyramid, of a size and shape to have held complete boats, though so shallow that any superstructure must have been removed or disassembled. It is not clear how these pits were sealed, as the span is too large for stone slabs, which may be why they were found empty apart from ropes and a few fragments of gilded wood found in one pit by Reisner. However in May, 1954, the Egyptian archaeologist Kamal el-Mallakh discovered a fourth pit, a long, narrow rectangle, still covered with slabs of stone weighing up to 15 tons.


posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 09:29 PM
Lol it is so ironic... they use carbon dating to date the arc to 4000 years old and when scientists say that earth is 4.7b years old using similar methods like radiometric dating they don't believe it and they label it as circular reasoning.

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 09:33 PM
So now you admit that the Popul Vuh stories are being deceitfully drawn into the flood stories. That was rather obvious. And the boats are really outside of the pyramids. So wonderful for you to admit the deceit.

Oops. Now you call them life boats. Another foul error to do that.

So why don't you admit to all here that you made a little mistake in connecting the Popul Vuh to the biblical myth. Okey dokey.

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 09:35 PM

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand

The boat was not in the pyramid as you stated. The Mayan flood story is not a flood of water and it does not kill off everyone.

Your claims are a bit off the mark.

Not everyone in Noah's story dies either.

Where is this off mark? Can you be specific?

Let me ask you. Why do so many cultures have a flood myth? Do you think all these people came up with the idea separately? Do you think your ancestors had any different goals then you do? Do you think they were just oafs who had no ingenuity or wisdom. Think again....that's what repent means.

[edit on 27-4-2010 by letthereaderunderstand]

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 09:36 PM
So here are these photos from various places and none of the photos show where a lot of animals were held. The photos look more like cabins for monks. They are austere and for human habitation rather than for animals.

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 09:42 PM
reply to post by expatwhite

Wasn't the supposed ark made of a particular type of wood? We would need a match there. to verify authenticity. (No pun intended.)

Certainly, tar being a rather inert material should be found in quantities among the timbers. And we wouldn't expect to find much tar naturally up at 4k meters elevation.

And a real big break would be to find fossilized dung from a whole bunch of different animals!!! That would be the icing on the cake--well, no, it wouldn't would it? Not exactly anyway.

[edit on 27-4-2010 by Aliensun]

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 10:00 PM
reply to post by SLAYER69

Ya that was a great read. I remember it now...

Here is another interesting aspect of changes in the earth during human history looking at Tiahuanacu.

Tiahuanacu In the Andes

In the Andes, at 1 6 '22' south latitude, a megalithic city
was found at an elevation of 12,500 feet, in a region where
corn will not ripen. The term "megalithic" fits the dead
city only in regard to the great size of the stones in its
walls, some of which are flattened and joined with pre-
cision. It is situated on the Altiplano, the elevated plain
between the Western and Eastern Cordilleras, not far from
Lake Titicaca, the largest lake in South America and the
highest navigable lake in the world, on the border of
Bolivia and Peru.

"There is a mystery still unsolved on the plateau of
Lake Titicaca, which, if stones could speak, would reveal
a story of deepest interest. Much of the difficulty in the
solution of this mystery is caused by the nature of the
region, in the present day, where the enigma still defies
explanation." So wrote Sir Clemens Markham in 1910. 1
"Such a region is only capable of sustaining a scanty popu-
lation of hardy mountaineers and laborers. The mystery
consists in the existence of ruins of a great city at the
southern side of the lake, the builders being entirely
unknown. The city covered a large area, built by highly
skilled masons, and with the use of enormous stones."

When the author of the quoted passages posed his ques-
tion to the scholarly world, Leonard Darwin, then presi-
dent of the Royal Geographical Society, offered the
surmise that the mountain had risen considerably after the
city had been built.

"Is such an idea beyond the bonds of possibility?"
asked Sir Clemens. Under the asumption that the Andes
were once some two or three thousand feet lower than
they are now, "maize would then ripen in the basin of
Lake Titicaca, and the site of the ruins of Tiahuanacu
could support the necessary population. If the megalithic
builders were living under these conditions, the problem
is solved. If this is geologically impossible, the mystery
remains unexplained."

Several years ago another authority, A. Posnansky,
wrote in similar vein: "At the present time, the plateau of
the Andes is inhospitable and almost sterile. With the
present climate, it would not have been suitable in any
period as the asylum for great human masses" of the
"most important prehistoric center of the world. "End-
less agricultural terraces" of the people who lived in this
region in pre-Inca days can still be recognized. "Today
this region is at a very great height above sea level. In
remote periods it was lower."

The terraces rise to a height of 15,000 feet, twenty-five
hundred feet above Tiahuanacu, and still higher, up to
18,400 feet above sea level, or to the present line of
eternal snow on Illimani.

The conservative view among evolutionists and geolo-
gists is that mountain making is a slow process, observable
in minute changes, and that because it is a continuous
process there never could have been spontaneous upliftings
on a large scale. In the case of Tiahuanacu, however, the
change in altitude apparently occurred after the city was
built, and this could not have been the result of a slow
process that required hundreds of thousands of years to
produce a visible alteration.

Once Tiahuanacu was at the water's edge; then Lake
Titicaca was ninety feet higher, as its old strand line dis-
closes. But this strand line is tilted and in other places it
is more than 360 feet above the present level of the lake.
There are numerous raised beaches; and stress was put on
the freshness of many of the strandlines and the modern
character of such fossils as occur."

Further investigation into the topography of the Andes
and the fauna of Lake Titicaca, together with a chemical
analysis of this lake and others on the same plateau,
established that he plateau was at one time at sea level,
or 12,500 feet lower than it is today. "Titicaca and Poopo,
lake and salt bed of Coipaga, salt beds of Uyuni several
of these lakes and salt beds have chemical compositions
similar to those of the ocean." 7 As long ago as 1875
Alexander Agassiz demonstrated the existence of a marine
crustaceous fauna in Lake Titicaca. 8 At a higher elevation
the sediment of an enormous dried-up lake, whose waters
were almost potable, "is full of characteristic mollusks,
such as Paludestrina and Ancylus, which shows that it is,
geologically speaking, of relatively modern origin."

Sometime in the remote past the entire Altiplano with
its lakes rose from the bottom of the ocean. At some other
time point a city was built there and terraces were laid out
on the elevation around it; then in another disturbance
the mountains were thrust up and the area became un-

The barrier of the Cordilleras that separates the Alti-
plano from the valley to the east was torn apart and
gigantic blocks were thrown into the chasm.

[edit on 27-4-2010 by Xtrozero]

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 10:06 PM

Originally posted by liquidpain
Lol it is so ironic... they use carbon dating to date the arc to 4000 years old and when scientists say that earth is 4.7b years old using similar methods like radiometric dating they don't believe it and they label it as circular reasoning.

I don't know... I guess it is how you look at it. If there was a major upheaval in the world 4k to 7k years ago with massive extinctions and the human race being hit extremely hard to be almost erased too....then saying humans started about that same time could have a connection as to why the date is so short compared to how old everything actually is.

[edit on 27-4-2010 by Xtrozero]

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 11:08 PM
Wow that is a really interesting article you found. I am not a christian (or religious) but I am very interesting in the historical facts of the bible and koran. Both books do have actual accounts of real history, but because the catholics back in the day decided to leave out the less mystical parts of the bible it is easy to dimiss the whole book as a story. Many of the people and empires mentioned in the bible did exist and Ihtink to better understand the bible and the people in it, we do need to find the evidence of the sometimes outlandish stories in it. I meanthere are historians and scientiststhat say a great flood did happen many years ago and the story of noah is the embellished version of what really happened.

top topics

<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in