Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Can you believe it? Scientists may have found Noah's Ark!!!!! That could just confirm millions of people's faith out there. It's amazing....
Well, supposedly there was a satellite photo of a glacier on mount ararat (where the Bible says the ark ended up) and theres a large dark spot in this glacier that could be the ark!!!!!! gosh this is great!!!!!!

if anyone has any updates, post!!!!!!!!!!

heared of the no-religion rule?

oh well, as long as no mod has bothered closing:

it means nothing
there were and are still floods, in all parts of the world there are legends about a huge flood, and still they all survived. So what you might have foudn a piece of a boat?

yes yerssot most people hvae heard of the no religion rule.

I hope the mods wont close this for no reason
As long as it stays clean it should stay open

Before I can comment, I need your sources. Was this published in a scientific journal, and if so, which one?

was on the news today gregory they have found something

anywayz as yerss says this proves nothing

the evolution thread turned quite religious...but it was an excellent debate and everyone kept their cool. I hope the same goes here.

Personally I find it hard to believe the story in the 1st place. How is one guy going to find 2 of every animal on the planet?

Steve Irwin the croc hunter has trouble finding crocs sometimes and it's his job....Noah was just handy with a hammer.

doesn't matter really since it is just symbolism

*australian accent*
Look at the teeth that croc's got! I will slowly come from behind him and jump on his back making sure he can't move his mouth

*jumps on fire, placing foot in his neck*

bends over backwards and kicks yerss in his back

The news is not a reliable source for scientific information. And I still don't know who found something. I'm not claiming that they didn't find something, but in 1989, there were news reports that Noah's Ark had been discovered. Remember? Probably not, since once an actual team of scientists looked into it, it turned out to be perfectly natural.

well if they only found i today or yesterday I dont think you're gonna find much more scientific information

and if it was on the news (dunno about the news in the US but that in belgium usualy is pretty right) they will have found something

and it won't be the ark since that thing doesn't exist

Fire... if you got it from VTM... than it's mostlikely a blown up story

There is the historical prove of a flood of the Euphrates in old Babylonia and of ark who probably finished is travel in mount Ararat during that flood . I think people must search for more information before talk about something. And: some of the older biblical stories are true and based in real facts. But dont misunderstood history and religion. History can be a the essence of religion but an arc is not a prove of nothing..just an historical fact.

And dont argueabout this with me bcs I have enough christian education to f*** you all. It is the necessary condition to be agnostic.

Sorry for my bad humour but my dinner was awful..

But now talking serious: my grand pappa lost his boat near Ararat

of course, the chance of there actually being a boat made are very high, the crap of it being devine and this "noah" to have gotten all animals (well, two of each) on the ship... no chance

than we can start believing the indian story of the whale

bible is full of alegoric stories...just remember KMC Tower ...err Babel Tower

ok found it

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/04/26/noah.ark.ap/index.html

The story of a boat like structure on Ararat or a nearby mountain has been current since at least the Middle Ages... it crops up every now and then when news is slow, and then dies down again. several expeditions have examined the strange structure with mixed results... some have "proved " it ton be natural, others have "proved it to be man-made... give me a week or two and I can give you abit of a bibliography... there are actually at least two such formations, one on Ararat itself, and one about fifty miles away if memory serves... one interesting theory is that they were built in the erly middle ages by monks wishing to cash in on the lucrative pilgrimage business....

Mount Ararat in Armenia woot Armo power

damn turks took our land cuz of genocide

and also many scientists/historians believe that noahs ark (from the bible) is actually taken from a story found in the Epic of Gilgamesh.(mesopotamia)

well, the epic IS very old and does talk about a flood

yes it does...and honestly i believe in the Epic of Gilgamesh flood story than the noah's ark story in the bible

but thats just what im feeling.

oh sorry, i had no idea about the religion thing. im not forcing anyone into christianity, i just found it interesting. its okay if its closed though, its just really interesting. i personally think that has to be it, because all of the aging tests with the remains of the ark are accurate to the time period in which it was made. it also can be proved to be man made because of the the organic compounds such as carbon, found in the wood. yet some people might mistake this ark or ship to be too modern to be noah's ark, because of titanium metals found on it. But once again, all can be proved wrong, because it states in records and in the Bible, that there was metallurgy 4,000 years ago, so the metal parts found (like rivets) are also accurate. Now, most of it has withered away because it is over 4,000 years old. but tell me this, since the aging tests are all accurate, what else could it possibly be??? all of the information can be found on dozens of archelogical sites, but www.wyattmuseum.com in particular has a ton of proof and information. check it out if you're skeptical.

noahs ark is only meant to be about 4'000 - 5'000 years old, and yet the last really significant submergance of land was about 11'600 years ago, at the end of the last Ice age, when most of what is now the south china sea and Indonesia was submerged (the subcontinent was larger than australia before the submergance).

Most of the cultures throughout the world have ancient myths about floods. However, although the epic of gilgamesh only dates back about 5'000 years, most of the others (many of which are linked to the altantian mythology) date back to approximately 11'600 years ago. This matches exactly the time of the end of the last ice age when most of the indonesian/south-eastern china subcontinent was submerged. Also, this was the precice date when Krakatoa (located between Java and Sumatra in the south China Sea) tore itself apart in its largest known explosion so far. Some have speculated that it was this explosion that caused the hot ash from it to land on the polar ice caps, causing them to melt quicker, and triggering the end of the last ice age, resulting in the submergance of the subcontinent.

The current thinking amongst the atlantean mythology is that it was not located in the atlantic, but rather in the submerged subcontinent. It would have been at the time the largest lowlying flatland, and therefore the most fertile place on the planet. And since the vietnaam war, it has been almost impossible to scan the bottom of this region of the sea, due to political restrictions. Many think that this was the original inspiration for the epic of gilgamesh/noahs ark story.

http://www.atlan.org/articles/atlantis2/zoom/fig2.html

If they found it...cool...if not that's still ok....my faith will not be shaken either way...

Like eleven inches says, most culture have a tale/myth about a devastating flood

there are no historical prove of an ark that ended its journey in mt Ararat. That proof only exsist in some religious people wet dream

I don't understand how they can prove it to actually be Noah Arc. Even if it is a boat in a iceberg somewhere that looks just like what Noah's boat would have, how could they prove it's actually teh right one? Find two skeletons of every animal ever in existance on the boat?

from CNN
.Geologists say even though there is evidence of a flood in Mesopotamia in Sumerian times, it is not possible for a ship to make landfall at an altitude as high as Mount Ararat

I doubt that the entire world was flooded, as it says in the story. At the time, they did not know of the whole world, and what they clearly would have been reffferring to would hae been the known world. I doubt that 'noah' would have been able to travel to antartica, australia and all other continents just to get rare animals like kangaroos and penguins (that he would not have been aware of anyway).

I like to think that the original flood story mythology (pre-gilgamesh mythoogy) originated from the end of the last ice age, and the submergance of the indonesian subcontinent.

If any of the biblical pre-flood cities were known of at the time, then it would make sense that they would have returned to those cities, or at least the cities would have been found by archeologists. The only explanations for not rediscovering them are :
1. That they never existed at all
2. That people have not been looking in the right place for them.
3. That they are still submerged.

I also thing that the waters did not recede at all. I think that instead, they simply journeyed so far until they made contact with land that had not been flooded, and that the original 'eden' is still underwater.

I dont think that would confirm few millions of people's faith...

If Egyptian government would let archeologys dig under the Sphinks, they could possibly find something that would crush most major religious

Like many people said so far, how is anyone gonna know if that was Noah's arc? Are they gonna compare pieces of wood that look like a boat, with what it says in a book written by the people who thought the earth was flat and geography of earth quite..wrong?

Oh, and I wanna know, how the hell didnt the wood roth after all this time? Many landscapes shifted and changed in such a long time, so....how did the 'boat' or the bits of the boat survive all these times...in the nature!

The Omega> you never fail to impress!!

it could have been covered in ice (at the top of a mountain)

that still doesn't explain how it got there since believe apperently is, that it can not ever have been up there in the first place

[QUOTECorlindel> Yes, there has been floods in the past on Earth. But WHAT historical proof of what ark are YOU referring to? And how do you know that some of the older biblial stories are true? That the stories are BASED on facts, such as a king we know lived and some such STILL doesn't make the bible true.
So I am indeed arguing with you - go ahead and answer. If you can.


Dear Omega:

You are beeing to much fundamentalist. And it seems that you assume a fact as and intemporal and dogmatic thing that can not change. What is treu today can be a fairy tale tomorrow. Facts change as everything. As you know about the history of science and it evolution.

I never said Bible is true or a lie about nothing. But it is a very good beginning for archeological studies and "vice versa". The importance of the old testament was enormous and still is a good source of knowledge about the mesopotanian civilizations, even before the archeological local discoveries and science developments.

As part of a scientifical and rational investigation; the search of facts needs to tolerate all the possible sources to find the true. And the enormous evolution at the XX century is just the beginning.

If you are sure about everithyng you say better for you. I am not sure about nothing so, all the information you give is precious. And even if it is not I like to know people points of view.

Thanks for "arguing with me" but in KMC I only "argue" to have funny, so better for you to find another guy/gal

Best wishes

Corlindel

Ah! As I said before I am not christian and I am not creationist so..

(How you say "so bad" about everything wich have some kind of connection with religion it is better to explain to all that: Hamurabi law code was the first wrote Code of ever. It is a fact.) Just to clarify other members bcs I am sure you know all the facts about all

I'm glad somebody has their facts straight. Face it people, Noah's Ark is not a true story. Even if you disregard how implausible it is to gather 2 of every animal in the world, the story just doesn't make any sense. Satellite images showed a shape in the shadows that appears to look like a large boat. Then again, there was a large face on the surface of Mars...

Corlindel> Why d you refuse to answer my VERY simple questions? I'm sorry to disappoint you, but you're the one acting like a fundamentalist in here.

You wrote:" There is the historical prove of a flood of the Euphrates in old Babylonia and of ark who probably finished is travel in mount Ararat during that flood . I think people must search for more information before talk about something. And: some of the older biblical stories are true and based in real facts. But dont misunderstood history and religion. History can be a the essence of religion but an arc is not a prove of nothing..just an historical fact.

And dont argueabout this with me bcs I have enough christian education to f*** you all."
So what historical fact are we discussing here? Facts are subject to change, indeed. But only if anyone can offer proof that warrants a change. And this "dark spot in ice" nonsense won't change any facts.
Why, pray tell, is the Bible a good beginning for archeological studies? Most of it is unproven myths. And the parts that are based on factual events/persons are so riddled with faulty translations (such as the one that turned the Roman Morningstar and a Babylonian King into Lucifer).
"The importance of the old testament was enormous and still is a good source of knowledge about the mesopotanian civilizations, even before the archeological local discoveries and science developments." Says who?

"As part of a scientifical and rational investigation; the search of facts needs to tolerate all the possible sources to find the true." Even if the source is continously known to be a liar?
"And the enormous evolution at the XX century is just the beginning." Which is in parts thanks to religion leaving science alone. Makes you think - doesn't it?

"If you are sure about everithyng you say better for you. I am not sure about nothing so, all the information you give is precious. And even if it is not I like to know people points of view." Oh, I'm sure about what I say. I investigate things. Do you?
Please show me where I consequently say religion is bad. It's true - I see no good coming from it, esecially when myths and unproven legends about a man and a boat s treated as fact. We don't need these culturally accepted delusions - be they gods, angels, UFOs or alien abductions.
"Thanks for "arguing with me" but in KMC I only "argue" to have funny, so better for you to find another guy/gal "
So, you give up already? What a shame...

ok, here's a question for ya... How the hell did a boat get frozen in a glacier? The bible is what, no more than... Say four thousand years old? And the last ice age was when? So, if it's actually inside the glacier, which was certainly implied by the news story, how did it get in there in the first place?

with the material they used combined with all the animals that piece of a vessel named Noahs ark wouldnt be able to float, it would have been stuck to the ground due to its weight.

last ice age ended about 11'000 - 12'000 years ago

Omega:

"Why, pray tell, is the Bible a good beginning for archeological studies?Most of it is unproven myths. And the parts that are based on factual events/persons are so riddled with faulty translations (such as the one that turned the Roman Morningstar and a Babylonian King into Lucifer)."

-Ofc most of it are unproven miths and lot of them really silly.
But most of the archological discoveries in Mesopotania at the XIX/XX CENTURY were made following the old testament.
Just interpretate the Bible as a ancient manuscript as another else forgetting the religion mentions. That's what I meaned. For example:
The troian wars and the city of Troy was always considered a Mith, wich was is source on Iliiad. Of course we dont have proves of the existece of a gy named Heracles or Heitor or Ajax, and other Hellenic semi-gods, but the city of Troy was discovered...understand me...Why do you give so silly examples like that of Lucifer? You are mixing all, it seems you are talking alone and putting your silly exmples in my mouth.

"Says who?"

An actual example that you can apply to Israel/Palestina conflict: Do you heard something about the long escape from Babylon to the Egipt? Do you know something about the common roots of Muslins and Judaism roots? Do you know the history of the present middle-east and why everyone claims that piece of earth as yours? Well the escape from Babylon really happened...Go inestigate some of this.

"Even if the source is continously known to be a liar?"

Well, I dont believe Bible too, but I think you met the wrong persons on your life. Liars are the ones who use the Bible or attack the Bible to get their purposses. And you have a toleration handicap. The old Bible is just a book, an alegoric book full of information. Historic, sociological and geographical. As all, there are good things to learn and bad things to
forgive.

Omega: "Makes you think - doesn't it? "

No you are right. But where did I say the opposite? But remember that religion gave is contribution to the evolution of knowledge. The problem was when science became the primary religion enemy...But that is another story.

"Oh, I'm sure about what I say."

Yes. I know you are sure about what you say I know a lot of people who are sure of what they say too.

"I investigate things. Do you?"

A lot...

"Please show me where I consequently say religion is bad. It's true - I see no good coming from it, esecially when myths and unproven legends about a man and a boat s treated as fact."

Maybe you became an unproven legend, and some of the present facts became a Mith too. I would like to think that in future people would not think about the present as a Mith, even if the proves disappear.
Wtf!!! A boat!?! Oh yes this is the "Boat trhead" There were a lot of boats over the Euphrates and the Tiger rivers. No mather what this supposed boat was, but if there is a boat there we will learn something with it. That I am sure. And there will be new facts to our study.

"So, you give up already? What a shame..."

Give up what? Shame?! Why? Competition is good but I use this to amuse myself not to spend my time or win anything to myself. And as you said, you are sure about everything and it seems you know what you want and need, and I am not an encyclopedia to give you all the information. So, How you like to investigate. Keep on but I hope you find that you are not so sure about everything you say.

that is plain ignorance

The city of Troy have never been discovered, there is still no evidence that any of the events described by Homer ever took place. The name Troy does not appear in any of the Greek written records. If there was a major city called Troy anywhere in the Aegean area, no one at Knossos or Mycenae or Pylos mentioned it.

Some archaeologists and historians maintain that none of the events in Homer are historical. Others accept that there may be a foundation of historical events in the Homeric stories

well, I wouldn't place it like that finti... they DID found a city that matches Troy very closly

though the whole Homer-story is indeed very unlikely

Sorry to disappoint you! But have you hear about Schliemann?

Go investigate No need apologizes I understand you

corlindel, ... see my post above

no text or artefact has ever been found which clearly identifies this site as that of Troy, or indeed confirms that any such place as Troy ever existed.

An archaeological layer known as Troy VII, which has been dated on the basis of pottery styles at 1275-1240 BC, is the most often cited candidate to have been the Troy of Homer. It appears to have been destroyed by a war, and there are traces of a fire. The problem was that Troy VII is a hilltop fort, not a city, and certainly not the city of the size described by Homer.

yes and see my previous post about his hill city of Troy, known as Troy VII

it wasn't the only layer that showed signs of fire and war

I said! No need of apologizes

"Liars are the ones who use the Bible or attack the Bible to get their purposses."

I use this phrase to explain that worst than a book is the way people interpretate a book for a way or another - and I must say again I am not Crhistian..Ummm..I am getting to much prophetic Maybe I had been contaimned for some religious virus...

still was only a fort, way to small for the Troy Homer described
None of Knossos or Mycenae or Pylos never mentioned Troy in the Greek written records.
It is like the US history wouldnt mention Alamo

Priest, Bishops and Popes in other words

oh don't get me wrong fint, it just sounded to me like you thought it was the only layer that got fire and war signs

Ok. The excavations are still going and it were found about nine cities - with walls and gates, not just artifacts - only the future will show us and prove if it is the mithical city of Troy.

But - AND BACK ON TOPIC - the discouver of these cities happened bcs Schlieman followed a mith, the Iliiad of Homer. And that is the point and the importance of a book, or the Bible or the sports magazine, or the boat (Ark if you want) recently discouvered.

All the circunstances shall be important to define the facts, even religious, miths and legends that make us dream and searching for the true, even if the true it is not what we were searching for.

Maybe They have found the LOVE BOAT

Some of them yes another no. Dont generalize Ok, most of them yes

more like he was spellbound by the story of Troy and his destiny was to find wether Troy was fictional or not.

Just like the legend of Robin Hood, myth or is ther any truth to it?

Atlantis, people have been searching for it for centuries.

Yep. It was the beginning.

I'm not a Christian either... but I accept most of the bible as a true if biased historical book... most of it.... a lot of it ties in with what we know of Egyptian and Assyrian history, if you take away the "chosen people "slant... remember that the current dating system used by Egyptologists, "Sothic Dating" was actually an invention, and that standard dating may be wrong... as several people have shown, by moving the accepted dates slightly, everything fits into place... there is also the theory that links Moses to the Pharoah Tuthmoses, and the Hyksos, or Shepherd Kings... and I went to a Church School, and our Curate told us in no uncertain terms that when Pharoah went after the Israelites and Moses, it was not to bring them back, as Exodus states, but to make sure the troublesome little bu**ers actually left... and as for animals goiung in two by two, my Bible states that Noah was told to take seven of every clean beast, and three of every unclean one...

I looked it up and it states:

"19 You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you. 20 Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive. 21 You are to take every kind of food that is to be eaten and store it away as food for you and for them."
(Gen 6, 19-21)
(from biblegateway.com)

If there were only 2 of every animal, would that mean that all animals are inbred?
If so, wouldn't all animals have eventually developed some sort of genetic disorder inherent to inbreeding?
Also, wouldn't it mean that all humans are inbred??

by the looks of some: yeah, definitly inbred

Noahs ark story does not actually mean that the entire world was flooded, just the entire known world. How would they even have known if america was flooded, when they didnt even know that america existed?

the jaguars jumped over to tell them?

lol.
Also, it would be virtually impossible to get 2 of every species. THere are billions of species of insects alone.

ow eleveninches, now you're braking off people's religion
do go on

If you had only 2 of every animal of the ark, you would only have a few left at the end of it, because:

1. If you didn't feed the animals, they would die
2. If you did feed some of the animals, then the ones that got eaten would die.

and than you haven't mentioned the problems with the woodpeckers

Yeah. And can you imagine the sanitation problems .ewww

oh yeah, they've been found Noah's Ark. I heard it's somewhere in Anartica, but it's so cold, that no one can get to it.
Can't you just imagine if scientist could get to the ark?? They would charge like, $1000, just to go tour the ark. Good thing they can't get to it!!

So how exactly did noah get from antarctica to the middle east?
And why would he have left his boat there just to get another boat to the middle east

I know, it was a rhetorical question

Yeah, and if he got all the animals, why wouldn't he bring all the plants, too? And the protists and the fungi and the monerans and the viruses

who said they have to know a place for it to get flooded. Natural disasters doesnt care about human knowledge

if a tree falls in a forest and nobody is around to hear it fall, does it make a sound. ...


Some animals are only found in continents such as Austraila , North & South America and the Artic Poles. How did Noah get hold of these?

so, from mount ararat it went to antartica?
and how convinient they "can't get it", you do know that there are people (Dixiedancecourt and someone else, both belgian) who pass poles for scientific research? they CAN get there!

I think they will find the boat I used to play when I was kid, full of Airfix miniatures and some plastix Dino's somewhere near Beijing

My point was that they could only have been sure that the known world was flooded. Just because the known world was floooded does not mean that the entire world was flooded

I doubt that he had kangaroos, koalas, anacondas, penguins, polar bears, ect..

Also. he kept birds in his boat. Why?? Why didnt they just fly around?

Birds needs to rest sometimes,
did the predators go vegetarian for the journey, why didnt the bird eat the insects?

What would be the point to flood only the known world, after all it was the so called god`s plan to flood. Surley he/she/it must have known all of the world

I thought it was only his plan to wipe out the humans.
I know that humans had settled all over the world well before 40'000 years ago, but I really thought that the bible implies that it was just his intention to wipe out the wickedness of civilization.

humans was spread around the globe so if so called gods intention was to whipe out the humans the entire globe had to be "drowned"...................yeah right

And if the world was flooded (due to the melting of the ice caps), then where exactly did the water go to when they saw land again?

I will only reply this and that about middle age the rest I will PM or post here later ok.

Ofc that "everything from some sorce" is not true as there are no evidences of most of all describe in the Bible. And so, thats I am not christian or a religious person. So I agree with you. What I am trying to explain is that no mather how many "lies" - I dont like this word - are there, Bible still is a good source of knowledge bcs help you to known social and culture facts of that age.

And ofc some, and I say it again, SOME christians going along the lines to presume that Bible is always true.
At least people learn that King Hammurabi really existed and that can be a beggining to learn more.

Ah! About that link, I didnt see it yet, but I understand what you mean.
But if you consider islam in ocidental middle-ages, and if you investigate it, you will see that religion was not an handicap to science evolution. Just remember the oriental medicin evolution comparing to the ocidental evolution at that time. This is just a point. Ofc that when religion is interpretated with fundamentalism there is no place for science or at least it is to difficult to cohabit.
But everiything has is place on time, and even if we think about the philosophy in middle age when our friend St Anselmus and St Thomas were science worst enemies, I think we must tolerate them and think that sometimes a step backward can help us to take two steps ahead firmly.

Conclusion: I agree with you but I still dislike your radical points of view.
paperbag3 naughty

No they can't. I'll try to find the article that I got this info from, but we've moved and everythings everywhere.

yes, there are people who can do reasearch and withstand the cold cold temperatures and stuff, but the article said that they can only spot the ark from a distance and they took a picture of it.

It is too far away from them to get to it, yet alone try and haul it out, so no, they CAN'T get there!

All I can say is that this all happend thousands of years ago, so perhaps they wern't that good with recording things. I dunno. that's my guess.

as a matter of fact they were good at recording things thousands of years ago, that is how we learned about life they lived then.

that's a lot of bull! if they really want it, they will do anything to get. From choppers to those planes that land and take of vertically it

But remember, we're dealing with Anartica. The coldest continent on the planet!! I think they said it's really far away.

Scientists have explored Anartica but they haven't been over the enire continent becuz it's too cold for their equipment.

They can still take detailed photos of the surface via sattellite.

true

Why would Noah have got off the ark in antarctica. You would need to explain how he got from Antarctica to the middle east with all of the animals without any of them dying.
There was no wood in antarctica to build another boat, so there was no way they could have got to where they ended up.

^exactly

No, no. Noah never got off the ark in Anartica. He got off of it in the middle east, or something. It's just that after all of these many years, the boat has wandered to Anartica.

I mean, after he got off the Ark, ever wondered what he did with that buge boat?? Perhaps God moved it there . ..

perhaps he destroyed the ARk to make a home and to start fire...just logically what i would do if i was in his position.

How many more times do you think Noah would have had to reproduce in order to repopulate the whole world?

sounds like a Clive Cussler book

as always Omega, very good reply

I didnt think life originated in afghanistan. i thought it started in the oceans

and how would you know this? obviously a lot of people here are not christian....well that doesn't matter. if it's not Noah's Ark then what is it? no one else can explain it. besides, the wood wouldn't rot because it WAS under a glacier and can then therefore have been preserved in a fossilized wood sort of way.

(sorry about my last post, i mean Agriculture not life :lol

It could be anything... Like a smaller boat unrelated to the bible... Or it might not be wood at all. What was it that they found, a dark spot on a satellite picture? Yeah, every time they see a large, dark shape on a satellite photo, it's definitely Noah's ark.

And finti would know that because it's just common sense. You can't just take a ship, pack it with two of every animal in the world, and row your boat merrily down the stream. Like somebody else already said, you couldn't even fit all the species of INSECTS in the world on a boat and make it float.

And nobody's explained yet how it got in the glacier. As I said before, the last ice age was somewhere around 11000 years ago. The old testament was written more like 4000 years ago.

I agree with you completly. I mean what else would be that big?? There's no "scientific" explanation to what they have found in Anartica.




Like I said. We have to remember that this was thousands of years ago. Weren't the continents of the world closer together then and then over the years they spread apart?? I dunno. I'm not trying to come up with excuses, but like beaujay1 was saying, being in Anartica, the coldest continent on the planet, the wood wouldn't have rotted becuz it was perserved.

And as big as Noah's Ark was, it couldn't have been a "small" boat that they found. Not that huge. Noah's ark was like, what?? 3 or 4 football fields put together?? That's huge!

And um, hun, the ark could DEFANITLY float. Remember, it rained 40 days and 40 night, continously. It didn't stop. If it were to rain 40 days and 40 nights today, I guarentee you, we would see a lot heavier things than Noah's Ark float.
I mean, think about it? That's a lot of rain. Why wouldn't the ark be able to float??

Uh... You're missing my point. My point being that I don't believe there was a flood at all. But even if there had been, wood doesn't always float... If you get a log and you weigh it down with a bunch of rocks and throw it in the pond, it don't matter how much water's in there, it won't float.

And I misunderstood a little bit.. I thought you were talking about the one on Mt. Ararat.

Furthermore, even if it was 3 or 4 football fields put together, you couldn't pack all the animal species in the world x2 in it.

It took years for Noah to even build the ark. It didn't happen over night or in one day. It took years for Noah to even build the ark!

I firmly belive that you could have packed every single animal on the boat. I'll have to look up exactly how big the ark was, but yeah, two of every kind, very possible.

Furthermore, I'll have to look up what type of wood Noah used. If my memory serves me right, it was this special type of wood that doesn't rot easily, but like I said, I will look this up and tell you all.

I just looked up some info. the ark was 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet high. (If you want the scripture, PM me)

It was built from resinous wood, which is genosha wood or something in the king james version??

that's pretty big.

you have to remember too though that the 'world' was a lot smaller back in biblical times, than the world we know today... I agree that there's not much chance that couples of even just every known species of animal in Africa would all fit on a boat that could still float, but the legend and myth of the story could still be based in some form of factual event... just because some African prophet type writer wrote that some crazy $hit built a boat and loaded every animal in their 'little world' by 2s onto the boat, doesnt mean there really was EVERY animal WE KNOW TODAY...

and, agree too that there could be any number of other folks, with other boats besides good ol' Noah from the block, now in the block of ice on the mountain or in Antarctica or where ever else they find blots or blips that they call boats... certainly with all the cray stories that DID make the cut and final print in the Bible as we know it, there were probably hundreds, thousands of twisted tales left on some editors desk or the famous circular file, or the bottom of some ancient paper shredder bin...

nice water-cooler chit chat, but essentially nothing to get all frazzled and furious over until there really is indisputable proof that there is something to talk about...

i wasn't getting frazzled or furious. I was simply saying. .

People who keep saying "its impossible to pack polar bears and jaguars into one boat! RAWRR!!" are just being ignorant. For the last time...

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE KNOWN WORLD 4000 years ago!

there is no north or south america so that counts out all the animals native to those continents...no australia..japan wasnt founded...so its mostly just animals in the middle east..middle east is the desert mostly and there are not to many diffrnt types of animals out there. put the piece together people and THINK. Thank you

known to whom?
According to the bible, didnt god create this world and wouldnt the creator know all of his creation?Some omnipotent, omniscient being!!!! According to the Bible, Noah took samples of all animals alive at the time of the Flood

There where people living all over this globe 4000 years ago, up here in the North under the receding glaciers, in both American continents, Asia and the pacific islands and so on.
So what is the known world???
Known to those who wrote the bible?, cause this clearly shows the flaws of the biblical stories, it cant comprehend with either time nor logic.

And that the boat measured 450, 75, 45 feet built out of wood just underline the statement of it being to way too heavy too float even without the animals.

it would have taken a couple of decades maybe more for even for a whole crew of people to build something as big as that ark was suppose to be( according to the bible the crew was just Noah, his wife, their three sons and three daughters-in-law.it seems difficult to imagine how such a small crew could even feed all these animals in a single day.)
How many forests would it take to provide the lumber for such a boat?


Problems after the flood. What about the animals after the flood, how would they get food, since there were only two of each species a lot of animals would go instinct as soon as the predator got to go hunting again. Not that that would be too much of a problem since there were so spears of animals to hunt.

uh... no. That's pretty big, indeed, but there is still no freaking way you could fit two of every animal in the world, let alone just one... If the flood really covered the entire world, like some Christians claim, and not just a smaller, localized area...

I hope that soon this will be proven that it is not Noah's arc. Modern times can't make a ship as big as the arc that held 2 of every species. Plus there is no way Noah would have been able to gather all of the animals. BULLSH*T!

yes they can, just not out of wood and wood only

I heard that they have found a new page from the bible in the dead sea scrolls. It is the lost front page of the bible, and it reads:

"To my dear John and Mary, the events and characters in this book are completely fictional and bear no resemblence to any persons living or dead"

It's not really true, but it would be good if it was

I meant they haven't, not couldn't.

The ark was still huge and it did fit all of those animals. Belive what you want, but I'm sticking to the Bible

good for you, I don't

so... how did he got animals from Australia? or America?
how could he make it in only 2 years?
and the animals? fed by tons of grass? even the carnivors?

ok the Biblical word 'ark' was a mis-spelling, mispronunciation. Noah was a scientist, not just a lowly dirt farmer who decided to build a boat. He constructed the ARCC: Alternate-Reality Convergence Chamber, which was, in essence, just a really big door, a gateway, if you will, to another dimension, an alternate reality, if you will...

He had a crazy theory that some day, the Earth would need to be repopulated by all species of animal, so he set out to create a menagerie of all creatures, with which to repopulate the planet in the event of such a disaster. He reprogrammed the machine with variables and logarithms such that changed the alternate reality so that he would step out into a region of that reality teeming with the life forms he needed to complete his list of 2x2s, he'd cross over to the alternate reality, hunt, stalk, and trap the animals he needed, then bring them back to his real reality, then he'd reset the machine to what he called 'Reality Zero' and sent the animals thru there, in pairs. He did this until he had been to all regions of the planet, gathered all species of animals... in this time, the animals stuck in Reality Zero had time to mate and procreate, the carnivores were given pick of the litters to feed upon, and the vegesaurus animals survived on the ample greenery of the untouched Earth of Reality Zero.

Finally content that he had contained all animals, Noah then instructed the ARCC computer, which he playfully named GOD, to make it rain, because Noah loved the rain, especially after a few long hard years of hunting... unfortunately, the rain made the ARCC computer short-circuit, malfunction, and GOD made it rain endlessly, and the real world, the world that Noah knew was destroyed... only he and his family survived by jumping to REality Zero...

Fortunately, Noah's sons and daughters were great minds, like him, and some were historians and some were fantasy-fiction writers, so they all got together and wrote some books, much like the Canterbury Tales... and they put the book together of all the 'facts' and 'fun stories' they had heard about in their life on the real Earth before the flood. The called the book their Bible, and it soon became Law..

that's the way it really happened, and now you know... so, even if they did find a really big boat in some iceberg, you know it can't be Noah's ARCC!!!

/\
I agree with you. It makes a lot more sense than anything else in the bible.

I watch too much sci-fi

hmm maybe you have a point

SlickRick69> The ARCC?

so any news on the findings on this so called Ark or did they mistakle it with Titanic

nope. It wasn't the Titanic.

To some, Biblical theories and all of the famous stories therein are unbelievable. Starting from...

The creation of the Universe and the World
The first man and the first woman
The great flood and Noah's Ark
The call for Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the Israel
The story of Moses and the 10 plagues
The 10 commandments
The prophets
The life of Jesus Christ
The Acts of the Apostles
The Church(es) of Christ
...and the Book of Revelations

All seemed to be nonsense for them. It matters with science and religion.
But if you only understand the Bible, it already conquered science before everything gets discovered.

If you don't believe the Bible, don't believe in it.

If you can't believe how did Noah get to gather all kinds of animals into one ark, it is the same as asking yourself...
HOW DID YOU LIVE?
Where did your life came from?
What did you live for?
Why did you live?
...and until when you are going to live.

I am sure, no scientist could ever answer that

not unless they ask the help of the BIBLE.

PLEASE EXPLAIN?


oh an attempt on logic reasoning, to bad it fails.

It is just as dumb reasoning as that of a bird can fly, a stone cannot fly, man cant fly ergo man must be a stone.

Where did your life came from?
my life came from my mothers womb after she was being impregnation
by my father

What did you live for?Why did you live?... actually the same question, but it is to bring on my family name

and until when you are going to live until I die

I am sure, no scientist could ever answer that
not unless they ask the help of the BIBLE.I hope you re not planning to ask any scientist those questions cause he/she might blow you away with the answers.

And to be honest I dont see how the bible helps out on these questions

I refuse to explain... I didn't owe it to anyone here.

I'm sure we will end up into a 'Religion-based' discussion.
And that is not allowed here, I guess.

I just give you a hint:

We have a lot of discoverers and scientists who once tried to discover the shape of the world... and/or how the world really looks like?
...until after Magellan's voyage, they just proved that the world is ROUND. But take note. That was only during the 16th century. But if they only read the Bible... there it says and describes that the world is ROUND.

The same thing happened when scientists and astronomers tried to count the stars... they hypothetically explained that stars were about ten thousand... and later proved that stars are more than ten thousand... later, they claimed that stars are countless. But the Bible has already made it clear that the skies are made of COUNTLESS STARS.

Another thing which makes the Bible the most unique book is that it predicts the future. The Book of Revelations has predicted the two world wars. It predicted the coming of the Man of Lawlessness and he was and still here on earth who sits in many waters upon the seven hills.. accompanied by a woman who drinked the maddening wine of adultery..

I hope you understand that. But can't break it down further...
That's just against the rules.

/\Exactly where did the book of revelations predict 2 world wars????

then stay away from this thread then

where, cause the original scriptures doesnt say a thing about the shape of the world. It was the christians of the middle ages that believed the world was flat. Vikings never believed it to be flat and a lot of scholars of the 1500 century didnt believe that either. Christoffer Columbus was bold enough to challenge the flatliners

so does a lot of different and older mythologies say

first of all The book of revelation is apocalyptic literature. We know of about 40, that we can still read and name, different apocalypses from the ancient world. Written before Book of revelation, so the author of this book of revelation had a very strong and clear paradigm of how the revelation literature should look and sound like. So to predict that humans would go to war in the future was as certain as rain is wet

if someone even remotely cares what I will say:
please talk about the ark, not how great the bible is supposed to be

What Ark? What is an Ark? What is a topic?

actually Yers so is the bible connected to the Ark

yeah, but from the last posts I read it's more about the bible saying the earth is round, and about the starts and the apocalyps

related topics

where is the time when mods were strict

dunno

well, you can still be all mean of course fint

damn right I can.........now where did I put my petit and cute viking battle axe

in queeq's head?

Oh... how... convinient...

No it did not. The Bible hasn't predicted anything, let alone the future. It's predicted the world would end 1000 years after the mythical figure Jesus died. It's now the year 2004 and... damn... the world is still here.
God says that if Adam eats from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, then the day that he does so, he will die. But later Adam eats the forbidden fruit (Genesis 3:6) and yet lives for another 930 years (Genesis 5:5). Genesis 2:17

Instead the Bible is littered with:
Injustice: God punishes Eve, and all women after her, with the pains of childbirth and subjection to men. Genesis 3:16

Absurdities: God creates light and separates light from darkness, and day from night, on the first day. Yet he didn't make the light producing objects (the sun and the stars) until the fourth day. Genesis 1:3-5

Cruelty and Violence: God drowns everything that breathes air. From newborn babies to koala bears -- all creatures great and small, the Lord God drowned them all. Genesis 7:21-23

Intolerance: An uncircumcised boy is to be abandoned by his parents and community. Genesis 17:14

Sexism: Lamech is the first of a long line of biblical men with more than one wife. It seems that God approves of such marriages. Genesis 4:19, 23.

Strange family values (Speaking of Noah): The "just and righteous" Noah plants a vineyard, gets drunk, and lies around naked in his tent. His son, Ham, happens to see his father in this condition. When Noah sobers up and hears "what his young son had done unto him" (what did he do besides look at him?), he curses not Ham, who "saw the nakedness of his father," but Ham's son, Canaan. "A servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren." Genesis 9:20-25
(This part is used by the KKK to justify segregation).

Weird science: Plants are made on the third day before there was a sun to drive their photosynthetic processes (Genesis 1:14-19). Genesis 1:11

Mysterious people: "And Cain knew his wife." That's nice, but where the hell did she come from? The Bible doesn't mention any of Cain's sisters. Well, maybe he married his mom. In any case, Cain and the mysterious Mrs. Cain have a son. His name is Enoch and he builds a city (population 3). Genesis 4:17

Foul Language: Lest ... they go a whoring after their gods ... and their daughters go a whoring after their gods, and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods." Exodus 34:15-16

hell we get to shave

This is not the Bible thread. . .