Noah's Ark Has Been Found. Why Are They Keeping Us In The Dark?

reply to post by Lazarus Short


I think that there may have been more than one Ark since the same story of the great deluge is scattered all over the earth. But out of many, here is possible proof of one. (I actually believe that it may be)

I wonder how the survivors of the human race would describe Yellowstone blowing 7000 years later and the struggle for survival. I'm pretty sure the face of earth would have changed a bit over that time as well.

Looks like natural geological formations. There are similar features in the nearby terrain, in case denial kicks in.

peter vlar

Bilk22
Well that's not quite a scientific paper now is it? It's doubtful the person that wrote it even had access to the materials as everything they wrote is anecdotal and not direct. Their conclusion was based on analysis of the pictures from the original article and their opinion of the geology of the area it was discovered in.

Hooked on phonics never made it to the mailbox did it? From the source material-

In the field, the supposed iron brackets have the outward appearance of pieces of black, metallic, elemental iron. The black, shiny surfaces, however, are characteristic of goethite (crystalline limonite), a hydrated iron oxide). This mineral is associated in the "structure" with black, ilmenitic, magnetite granules, and possibly pyrite or pyrrhotite because locally some sulfur is reported in chemical analyses. Both magnetite and goethite cause a metal detector to buzz just like elemental iron. Therefore, investigators might presume that they had found rusted iron metal (Wyatt, 1994). If Noah's ship builders had forged this supposed iron bracket in a primitive smelter, the bracket would not consist of iron that was thoroughly mixed with clay, quartz, calcite, and anthophyllite particles but would have been solid iron. In molten iron these matrix minerals would have been separated as slag or destroyed. Furthermore, scanning electron (SEM) chemical analyses of five different places in the iron bracket show the variability given in Table 2.

The reference to scanning electron microscopy indicates access to the material or at least the material analysis. The results of which show that the claimed materials are natural not man made. It's pretty cut and dry.

I guess it didn't make it into yours either.

Acknowledgments

Thanks are given to the MA-GUR Project for photographs and specimens and to David Liggett, Peter Weigand, and Barbara Collins for editorial suggestions.

If you want to be a wise ass on the internet you should cite better evidence from the source to make your point. I just performed a cursory read of it before. That said, it's still one opinion vs another opinion and if that needs explaining,I don't mean mine or yours

Blue Shift

Lazarus Short
The world he floated away from was smaller and less mountainous than our present world, thus the discrepancy between the Ark's elevation and the present amount of water on our planet.

Where does it say that in the Bible? Or are we just making things up here?

Why does the event have to be repeatable to convince some of you?

Not everyone just believes things people say or write without questioning them.

Well, no, the Bible does not say it, but I read, watch vids, get information here (a little) and there (a little). I connect dots and come up with ideas. Since I found that all the land masses fit together nearly perfectly on a smaller planet, we can see how the present volume of water would have been sufficient to cover the world, as the apostle said, that then was. The mountain part is more debatable.

Have you not seen my theory as to where the water came from?

wmd_2008
reply to post by ProfessorChaos

 

What if the found proof you had been lied to about god?

As with "proof" that I had been told the truth, "proof" that I had been lied to would have zero effect on my beliefs.

AfterInfinity

There's no real reason to suspect that there's even a reason to suspect that the ark was real.

edit on 17-12-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

That is your personal belief, and you're more than welcome to it.

reply to post by ProfessorChaos

That is your personal belief, and you're more than welcome to it.

Yes he is, but posting an obvious lie, on ATS, I thought wasn't tolerated.
This isn't rare tho and it makes the site look bad. But if ATS over looks it
I don't mind really, as it devastates the opposing view nicely.
Win Win

freakjive
reply to post by AfterInfinity

 

Again, I make no claims that this is true or not...

Then you probably shouldn't use the title for your thread stating "Noah's Ark Has Been Found. Why are they keeping us in the dark?"

I was very interested in this 'discovery' a number of decades ago. I thought it was very convincing. But after looking into it for quite some time, it was clearly not the real deal.

Regards,
Rewey

reply to post by freakjive


Oh Bollocks, this is not the ark, it didn't have points at each end, it's a rock formation. It's been debunked 30 years ago already.

Your theory means a certain rock formation in the USA is a real giant penis! Think that one through.

Rewey

freakjive
reply to post by AfterInfinity

 

Again, I make no claims that this is true or not...

Then you probably shouldn't use the title for your thread stating "Noah's Ark Has Been Found. Why are they keeping us in the dark?"

Again, I just copied the title from the article I posted. I was under the impression that the article title must be used as the thread title when posting from another source. However, it appears that is only for the "breaking news" forums.

Either way, I was not intending to mislead anyone on my thoughts. Thus my personal notes on the subject.

I was talking about this place with my teacher. He was head of Czech national geo institute, so he is respected in his field + he is really very open minded. So he visited the place and decided with utmost certainty that it is natural formation. He explained processes leading to such formation and shoved us similar in vicinity of Ark. My feeling was that he is bit disappointed with his findings. Wouldn't it be great to find the Ark?

reply to post by ghostfacekilah00

ghostfacekilah00
Ron Wyatt also found the actual site of the Exodus crossing, complete with commemorative markers placed by King Solomon and Egyptian chariot parts from the dynasty of Moses' time on the floor of the sea, where there happens to be an underwater land bridge. He found the real Mt. Sinai, which is in Saudi Arabia surrounded by a military fence as well as stone altars with carvings as described in the Bible and the huge rock that Moses split in half and water poured out of which inexplicably has channels eroded by flowing water at its base. Mt. Sinai is charred black at the top by fire (he snuck over the fence to analyze the rocks), though nothing flammable is found there and no such feature exists in the surrounding area. He found Sodom and Gemorah (spelling could be wrong) which had been devastated by falling rocks of sulpher which completely covered both cities in inexplicable quantities, especially for the area, and had even melted the rock there. The sulpher was analyzed in a lab, which showed the it to be more pure and hot burning than any natural sulpher. Wyatt found the Arc of the Covenant deep within an underground cave system in Jerusalem. Blood had dripped from the surface through a crack and landed on the mercy seat of the arc, which had been uncovered so that the blood actually landed where the Jewish high priest used to sprinkle lamb's blood for the sins of Israel. Wyatt found that the crack started at the base of where he believes Jesus' cross was placed (there was an Earthquake at the moment of Jesus' death that split the Earth and destroyed the Jewish holy of holies). Wyatt had the blood analyzed by Israeli scientists, who found that the blood was still alive and contained only 24 chromosomes, 23 from the mother and one Y from a father. Apparently an angel told Wyatt that the world would not know of his discoveries until "the antichrist institutes the Sunday law." Those who won't believe will have no excuse. God is good.

edit on 17-12-2013 by ghostfacekilah00 because: (no reason given)

Brilliant!!

And the evidence proving all this is where?
You are a con mans dream.

Could be a boat, however there are other similar formations in the lava beds nearby. Also, there is more likely a boat at high altitude on Ararat discovered by the Hong Kong Missionaries: www.csmonitor.com...

This may have been mentioned, but, even if every single bit of ice on the planet melted and all the water vapor in the air were to precipitate, sea levels would NOT reach even 1000ft above their current levels.

Here's an Interactive Map from National Geographic.

Here's an article from Weather.com that cites the NatGeo map linked.

In reality, Sea levels would rise about 215ft, and that's if ALL the water on the planet was condensate liquid.

Now, of course, there's always the MAGICAL option that some super deity that created the Universe simply Magicked the proportional amounts of water into existence to enact Divine Wrath upon the planet, and then Godly Magick Away the water to pre-Godly-wrath levels after sufficient Godly satisfaction in wrath sufficiently enacted had been done.
One COULD argue that, but, such an argument is entirely divorced from reason, and beyond that, it's a matter of agreeing to disagree in putting a fork in the whole thing and calling it DONE on all sides at that point.

From a standpoint of reason, however, unless a boat was constructed on site in some place way above this upward limit of 215ft above current sea levels, and people just pretended the constructed edifice, or folly had some real history behind it until it became a local mythology and later legend that got spread about and accepted as fact, there's no boats to be found on Ararat.
I mean, we've historical sites with megalithic structures that served ritual purposes where some of the stone work weighs in at dozens of tons.
It wouldn't be too far fetched for some prehistoric nutter to build a boat on the side of a mountain, where which later generations made up stories about it, embroidered the stories, so forth and so on.
That's a stretch, but, it's the only way you'll find a boat on that mountain.
It'd be a ritual boat than never did float.

reply to post by 13th Zodiac


And god it already looks like a lame interpretation!!!

Where's the aliens, where's the 'sons of god', where's the nephilim.....

Lame lame lame lame LAME

reply to post by AliceBleachWhite


What about a foreign planetary body passing Earth with enough gravitational pull to 'pull' the water up to the theorised heights it reached?

reply to post by LightAssassin

That isn't exactly how tides work but are you saying that the rain "for forty days and nights" is a muth?
Blasphemy!

LightAssassin
reply to post by AliceBleachWhite

 

What about a foreign planetary body passing Earth with enough gravitational pull to 'pull' the water up to the theorised heights it reached?

You may as well go with the argument that some magical Invisible Super Being in the sky magicked all the necessary water into existence and then magicked it away after being sufficiently satisfied with the enactment of his/its wrath.

Any boats supposedly 'grounded' resembling size enough to qualify as the biblical ark found above that upper limit of 215 ft above sea level would need be suspect of purpose built ritual "boats" that never actually ever floated.

Historically people have built far more complicated and difficult ritual structures, like, for instance, the Pyramids at Giza. It wouldn't be too far fetched for someone, or some group to build a ritual boat of any imaginable and even unimaginable size at an unlikely location to make up stories about which get passed on and down generations until the fabrication is lost, and the story is accepted as Historical 'Truth'.

Jim Scott
Could be a boat, however there are other similar formations in the lava beds nearby. Also, there is more likely a boat at high altitude on Ararat discovered by the Hong Kong Missionaries: www.csmonitor.com...

I'd say that "something" 14,000 feet up the side of a mountain is a lot less likely to be a boat than another "something" 6,000 feet up a mountain.

The Mediterranean Sea was used extensively as shipping/trade route to Asia Minor AKA Anatolia AKA modern day Turkey which was defended by the Byzantine empire. The Phoenician civilization (located in now modern-day Lebanon) along with The Ancient Roman Empire encompassed use of large wooden vessels called Galleys.

As influences and trade along the Mediterranean would have it, the knowledge and handiwork of ship construction would be originated and spread from the Ancient Roman Empire (later, Byzantine empire) to many other ancient civilizations including, but not limited to Ancient Egypt. It's likely certain forms and knowledge of metal work including gold, bronze, iron and silver were also spread in this manner, beginning in Ancient Rome, along the Mediterranian sea to Ancient Egypt, Asia Minor/Antolia/Turkey.

Herodotus' account (written c. 440 BC) refers to the myths of Europa. According to the Persians best informed in history, the Phoenicians began the quarrel. These people, who had formerly dwelt on the shores of the Erythraean Sea, having migrated to the Mediterranean and settled in the parts which they now inhabit, began at once, they say, to adventure on long voyages, freighting their vessels with the wares of Egypt and Assyria —Herodotus

classics.mit.edu...

...So

Conclusion

It's really no surprise that numerous ship artifacts (both somewhat in-tact and/or fossilised) would be found anywhere in the "Mediterranean Region", especially in modern day Turkey.
Many ships, and indentations where ships once were, were also discovered as early as 1954 in Egypt.

83