Ground Penetrating Radar Scans of Noah's Ark

Around September 2021, new scans of the Ark at Durupinar were publicly released for the first time, showing a framework of ship timbers unexplainable as a geological formation. The site is formally acknowledged by the Turkish government as the location of the Ark and the scans are being featured in an upcoming History Channel documentary. The scans appear to have been made with Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) using LiDar scanning techniques.https://www.israelhayom.com/...nd-true-location-of-noahs-arkA GIANT shape claimed to match the Biblical description of Noah’s Ark has been found by researchers using 3D scans. Biblical archaeologists used ground penetrating radar to study the boat-lik…

Thread copied here from the Ground Penetrating Radar Scans of Noah's Ark thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

Not to be skeptical or anything but I think I'll withhold judgement on this until some real geologists have a chance to verify.

What do you mean, "appear to be"? How should "Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) using LiDar scanning techniques" appear, considering that they are unrelated remote sensing techniques?Please explain.

Ground penetrating radar was presumably used as LiDaR is for surface mapping, but the coloration would seemingly indicate LiDaR was used in conjunction with GPR, as described here. I'm just speculating bit it seems apparent to me that both technologies were used in unison as the 3D mapping is specific to LiDaR."GPR allows for a fast and non-invasive surveying of structures and anomalies of the sub surface, by using electromagnetic radiation in the microwave range. The active remote sensing technique LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging, also known as Laser Scanning), measures the runtime of discrete light pulses in order to map objects and structures on the surface of the earth... A standard GPR-processing-workflow does not allow for a 3-dimensional visualisation of the results and complicates the detection of archaeological structures. Unlike, LiDAR which does allow for a 3-dimensional visualisation. A fusion of both techniques, by using Python scripts and the software packages REFLEXW - Sandmeier Scientific Software and LASTools - rapidlasso, applies the advantages and specialities of LiDAR and GPR, and allows to get a high-resolution 3-dimensional pointcloud."A Fusion of GPR- and LiDAR-Data for Surveying and Visualisation of Archaeological Structures - a case example of an archaeological site in Strettweg, District of Murtal, Austria - NASA/ADS

Pretty dubious. This is a Ron Wyatt claim, even rejected by many creationists who examined the site. Given the record of false claims I’d wait for a neutral expert analysis - which you won’t get from the people promoting the claims.

quote:

---

Pretty dubious. This is a Ron Wyatt claim, even rejected by many creationists who examined the site. Given the record of false claims I’d wait for a neutral expert analysis - which you won’t get from the people promoting the claims.

---

I am not a Wyatt adherent, but the site was acknowledged as the location of the Ark well before Wyatt, and is formally recognized as such today by the Turkish government. Until the Turkish government allows an archaeological excavation, it likely won't be broadly accepted in academia, but the recent LiDaR scans are sufficient proof to convince me that this is the Ark.

So why do these claims about LiDAR scans convince you over the existing evidence that it is a natural geological formation?Note also that LiDAR is not the same at all as ground-penetrating radar,

At the present time the evidence is too restricted to be conclusive. You, obviously, want this to be the ark and so are convinced on such scant and suspect analysis.We'll wait for any further, independant, analysis.

And here is Andrew Snelling’s response.I don’t see how the new reports are any better, and Snelling raises other points that need to be addressed.Again, even creationists have rejected the site. And for good reason. The scans don’t appear very convincing to me and - given the history of similar claims - I don’t see how I can trust the interpretation of the scans. Especially not with the evidence pointing to a geological origin.Edited by PaulK, : Restored url

I think we should fund the effort to excavate so it can be proven wrong and everyone can shut up about it.I see we have the usual sloppy claims"The project - Noah's Ark Scans - claim they have discovered "parallel line and right angles below the surface" which are "something you would not expect to see in a natural, geologic formation"." Red basaltic prisms

Well. I'm going to go ahead and be completely skeptical. We already know that the story of Noah's ark is fiction. We already know that creationist's claims that the story of Noah's flood explains this planet's geology and biology is fiction. All the geological evidence collected over the past 200 years refutes the silly idea that a flood is responsible for the Earth's geological formations. All the biological and paleontological evidence refutes the fictional Genesis stories of how modern life came to exist, and supports evolution as the process that led to modern life.Arguing about whether a fictional boat from a fictional story has been found is pointless.Jzyehoshua needs to show us actual evidence that the remains of an actual boat were found, and then, how it somehow refutes all the evidence that science has observed of the processes that led to the modern world.

Yes, indeed, he does need a lot more info on his boat. He's not going to get any, of course, so don't expect much.But this is a somewhat interesting geologic formation that some post doc might want to take on. It might be a caldera, a crater, the remains of a crashed alien spaceship, or tectonic shift. I’m hoping on the spaceship, like Jzyehoshua is hoping on the boat. Gotta wait for the real geologists to chime in, though.Go Team Spaceship!

You're not taking this seriously enough. It would obviously have to be an interdimensional time travelling spaceship! (Based on the evidence we have so far.)

Funny, it doesn't look like a police box.