Mt. Ararat Anomaly

That's not the one I was refering to. Noah's Ark Search - Mount Ararat

If that's the one (of the many, many sites claiming to be Noah's Ark) then I don't see where you have any evidence.In your link you certainly haven't provided anything that even resembles more than a rock outcrop.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I indeed answered your question. No, even if a large wooden structure were found on Mt. Ararat, I still would not believe that a global flood occurred in historical times. And I gave my reason -- there is no evidence what-so-ever for a global flood, and such a flood could not be explained without violating the known laws of science. You may wish to dispute the evidence for or against a flood, but according to the judgement of the moderators, that should be done in another thread. Hell, I might start another thread myself.What may be on-topic for this thread (subject to the moderators' discretion) is whether you really think that finding a large, ancient wooden structure on Mt. Ararat, all by itself, should convince someone that a global flood really happened. So we find a large wooden structure on Mt. Ararat. How does that, all by itself, form convincing evidence that there was a flood? I could come up with a lot of scenarios as to why there may be a large wooden structure on Mt. Ararat, none involving an actual global flood.

I believe there are several steps needed before the issue of a flood even broached the surface.First there would need to be some evidence that a large wooden structure existed on one of the Mountains of Ararat (where ever they may be).Next, there would have to be evidence that the structure was actually a boat and not some other type structure.If it can be shown to be a boat then it would need to be shown that it was a cattle barge.Then it would need to be dated.Once dated, it would be necessary to show that there is no more reasonable explanation for it's location.Then, and only then, might the issue of whether or not it is Noah's Ark be considered.But even if it passed all of the above, it would not be evidence of a Global Flood. That simply never happened.This message has been edited by jar, 04-04-2005 09:49 PM

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

jar wrote:"If that's the one (of the many, many sites claiming to be Noah's Ark) then I don't see
where you have any evidence.In your link you certainly haven't provided anything that even resembles more than a
rock outcrop."Also, this recently appeared in the news:Russian Scientists Say No Noah’s Arc on Mount Ararat
By News Article, Mar 27, 2005, 23:41
AxisofLogic - Commentaries
print:Russian Scientists Say No Noah‘s Arc on Mount Ararat | World News |Axisoflogic.comRussian Scientists Say No Noah’s Arc on Mount Ararat
MOSNEWS,Russia- Mar 25, 2005
http://www.mosnews.com/news/2005/03/25/ararat.shtmlNoah's Arc not on mt. Ararat - experts
Interfax,Russia- Mar 25, 2005
http://www.interfax.ru/e/B/politics/28.html?id_issue=1126...Noah's Arch Not on Mount Ararat - Experts
Sofia News Agency, Lifestyle: 26 March 2005, Saturday
Noah's Arch Not on Mount Ararat - Experts - Novinite.com - Sofia News AgencyThis is a classic example of how "negative" news gets buried on the last page, much less reported at all. Had they found Noah's Ark, it would have been headline news. However, few news organizations even consider not finding Noah''s Ark as being newsworthy enough to put on their web pages.The Sofia News Agency article stated:"The expedition was organized by the Kosmopoisk research center and the Unknown
Planet Television company."Maybe, we able to see soon on the Discovery, or some other cable TV channel, people climbing all around Mt. Ararat and not findng anything when the Unknown Planet Television Company releases a documentary on their misadventures.Another article, which I found was:Le Figaro Recommends Mount Ararat for French Mountaineers
By Anadolu News Agency Wednesday 30, 2005 Zaman online, ISTANBUL
http://www.zaman.com/?bl=hotnews&alt=&trh=20050330&hn=18011It looks like that Mount Ararat is or soon will be crawing with mountaineers of all sorts, now that the Turkish Kurds have made some sort of peace with the Turkish government. With all of these tourists equiped with all sorts of cameras and rock picks climbing all over Mount Ararat, it will be difficult to explain the lack of any hard evidence of any Ark fairly soon.Of course, the hard core creationist can always claim that French tourists took Noah's Ark all apart and took it home as souvenirsof their summer climb on Mount Ararat. :-) :-) Someday, we might be able to even buy pieces of the Noah's Ark collected by these mountaineers on Ebay. :-) :-)Best Regards,Bill
Houston, TexasThis message has been edited by Bill Birkeland, 04-04-2005 07:55 PM

Of course it`s the real Ark. didn`t Ron find Mr. and Mrs. Noah`s bones buried nearby? Unfortunately, they were stolen shortly afterward, so .............If the discovery of the Ark confirms the belief of a viewer, what does the non-confirmation do? Hang on, there`s a rumour it`s been found on that mountain over there.

Maybe my eyes are bad... I didn't see a thing in those photos.

Come on now. We all know it wasn't solid rock that was eroded at Mount St. Helens, but unconsolidated material in the form of landslides, lahars, tephra deposits, ash, etc.The bottom line is that 4,000 year old eye witness testimony is the ONLY line of evidence that supports the flood myth. Eye witness testimony isn't even all that great when it's a month old... or even days or hours. Ask any crime investigator. What IS solid evidence is the physical remnants of events/occurrences.So please, let's not start that "if you weren't there, then you can't say for certain" rubbish.As others have stated, even if some ark was found, it doesn't prove the flood. You're still left with the wrong geology.

This is way OT. Let's stick to the Ark and Ararat.

---

The problem isn't in your eyes. Rember what Carl Sagen said:Believing is seeing.This message has been edited by NosyNed, 04-04-2005 10:47 PM

Yes, and I've seen your errors many times before. Further discussion at Message 80.

why does the cia care about some crazy thing on a mountain? that sounds a bit off to me.

Bill - none of these news reports disclose where the searches were conducted on the mountain. That sort of information would be very useful as opposed to general statements about it not being on the mountain. It's a shame they weren't more specific.

I never claimed that the photos PROVE the existence of Noah's Ark. In fact, I said just the opposite. There are, however, credible eye witness accounts that lead me to believe that some large structure (whatever it is) may very well be on Mt. Ararat. Now, you all can slam my opinion all you want because I'm not attempting to prove its existence based on these photos. Unless something more substantial is discovered, it's merely speculation at this point.It's interesting that some wouldn't accept any evidence of an ark even it it floated by them because of their pre-disposition against the idea of a world-wide flood. IF a large ancient wooden structure matching the biblical description were discovered high up on a treeless mountain, what other explanation could there be for it?

a crazy guy who got a little excited about an end-of-dry-season rain?