Topic awaiting preservation: Noah's Ark (Page 1 of 3)

Ok so was it found or it was just some kind of crappy mud that looked like an ark?

a few people have claimed to have found "proof" in some form or another, but none of the claims have ever had any sort of validity (one that comes to mind was based on random geological anamolies under the ground that the guy claimed formed the outline of a boat like shape).

Actually, Noah's Ark is down in the basement. I've been using it for fuel to keep the generator for the shock therapy machine running.

Because of the age, it also makes for some interesting experiments with the mini-particle accelerator down there...


-- Unoriginal Cell 693 --

Let's not forgot the GigaMAG Electron Microscopes and the Stem Cell lab. Suho packs a lot down there in Korea, what with hardly any laws preventing it .

~Kicks Suho~

Idiot! You didn't hide the alchemy chemicals! Who knows what they could have seen!

Didn't they find it in turkey?

InSiDeR: What alchemy chemicals? I don't see any alchemy chemicals around here. And who would believe that we're just about to make a breakthrough in transforming base metals to gold, thus bringing the world economy to its knees? What a preposterous idea!

*clambers back down to the basement, whistling innocently*

no no no.
The turkeys were in the ark, not the other way around...
Silly counterfeitbacon...



[This message has been edited by mobrul (edited 11-21-2002).]

Supposedly, the Ark is on top of Mount Ararat in Turkey. No evidence is available to the public to prove the existence or not. And on top of that, the Turkish gov't has closed all outside access to the mountain, so now no one can go up there and find out if it's really there.
Several groups say that there have been expeditions and photographs and what not... The Soviet Gov't supposedly had an expedition in the late 60's or early 70's... But all of the "photos" are "Top Secret"... There's some blurry photos out there of something large and vaguely "ark-shaped" on top of Mount Ararat, but nothing good enough to prove it definitively...

And just think about it for a minute... living for the better part of a year in a 900 cubit by 400 cubit (what's a cubit) boat with 2 of every kind of animal, insect and micro-organism...
Bodhi - Cell 617

edit: spelling... new fingers... sorry...

[This message has been edited by bodhi23 (edited 11-21-2002).]

cubit = approx 18 inches...

Not a very big boat relative to what we are building now... And much to small to actually hold 2 of every animal (7 of some), and food for them all, which in many cases would be more animals...


-- Unoriginal Cell 693 --

The size of the thing happens to be one of the main bits of info used in debunking the whole ark theory...

(The "what's a cubit" line was rhetorical really, anybody remember that Bill Cosby sketch? But thanks for the precise measurement... I'm filing it away for future reference!)

Bodhi - Cell 617

I remember seeing a show on the Discovery channel about this a few years ago. It was a guy and his kid and they had found the ark and only part of it was sticking out of the mountain. They climbed inside of it and said it was real big and had all sorts of different compartments for storing different types of animals. It looked just like the common pictures of the ark. They had all of this on video tape. It was pretty cool.

I found some Ok pictures of it, but they are sort of blurry...
http://www.ayrow.com/noah.html http://www.cnrdesign.com/Noah's%20Ark.jpg

I remember the cosby skit.... Riiiight!

If you really wat to get to nitty gritty... assume that were talking base families of animals... like DOG, not pointer, labrador, doberman... just the basic animal. It leands creedence to the evolution theory and decreases the amount of animals that needed to go into the ark. Not by enough I'm sure but... hey, why not think about it. I've never understood why people can't believe in both creation and evolution...it's just....irritating that they can't accept the possibilty. There isn't any mention that it couldn't be that way in the Bible. So what's the big issue?


GrythusDraconis
Prince of Gold - Lord of Dragons

Grythus -
I'm just finishing a class this semester called "Belief in 'Weird' Things". Our first section dealt with Creation "Science" and why it was not a "science" at all, but a Pseudoscience.
There are actually degrees of belief in creationism. They start with the Flat Earth Theory (and there are still people who believe it... I'll link the site later, but they do exist...), and goes up to Materialistic Evolution, which is purely scientific evolution and uses no supernatural explanations. There's about 12 or so levels in between. The most popular belief system in the continuum is the Intelligent Designer theory, in which evolution is accepted, but supernatural intervention is believed to be required in order for certain things to occur within evolution... Make sense? That's sort of a super-condensed version of that lecture... but I think it answers your question... It's the folks who are on either extreme of the continuum that stir up all the trouble... But would you believe people still not only believe that the earth is flat, but also that it is the center of the universe? I thought, as a race, we'd come a little further than that...

Flat Earth Society
Here's the man behind it all

Bodhi - Cell 617

[This message has been edited by bodhi23 (edited 11-21-2002).]

bodhi, that sounds like an important class that you are taking. You are learning that people really are stupid. I hope you learn from it.

It's kind of scary that the vote of someone who still believes that the earth is flat carries the exact same weight in elections as you.

Yea Saw it in TechTv that Noah's Ark is on top of Mount Ararat in Turkey.... could be possible tho that it got frozen and the land shaped and it ended up there like skeletons of ancient fishes found on top of mountains.

bohdi: Lovely...that guy appears to be another one of those people who take the Bible literally instead of metaphorically. the bible is symbolic, not meant to be taken literally. Besides, up is realiative. The ancients took 'Heaven' to be everything above the earth, that big black blanket where the stars hang. Therefore, by their reasoning, the whole 'earth is round' thing is totally pluasible.

Oh, and does this guy care to mention how it is that we could fly directly down from the north pole, to the outh pole, past it and back up the other side? Wouldn't we just fly right off the edge?

That Flat Earth guy is some scary stuff. What I want to know is, where in the Bible does it say that the earth is flat? Well, I tell you: it doesn't. Of course Jesus went up when he ascended into heaven. Up is a relative direction, and up is still up whether the earth is round or flat. To say that a round earth makes the Bible a joke is ridiculous. I just don't get these people....

I must admit, that my jaw dropped when my professor told us that this society was still firm in its belief... I couldn't believe a person would be so close minded to the rest of the world... It just makes me sad.

This class has been the most REFRESHING thing I've done in a long time. Psychology departments all over the country are starting to provide similar classes. Look for course names about "Pseudosciences". The mental tricks we are capable of, the ways the media and the gov't decieve us simply by their reporting methods, however honest their intentions. The tricks scam artists play on our cares and beliefs, it's sort of sickening...

Now I'm not saying that supernatural things don't exist, but you really do have to take it all with a grain of salt. No one's proven definitively that anything supernatural truly exists, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. You just have to be conscious enough to sort the wheat from the chaff.

Bodhi - Cell 617

quote:

---

The Earth accelerating in circular motion would behave no differently than would a car taking a corner: loose objects (humans and animals would act like loose change or a cup of coffee on the dashboard) would slide around, or be thrown off completely

---

holy crap.

I recall thinking that when I was about 4 or so, and having to have my older brother explain some basic concepts to me....

wow. and I thought I had already seen the most ridiculous people on earth. I was wrong.

I dont think we should take bible as historical document but as a religeous document..

You can't take the Bible as a truly historical document. Most of the events in it are completely unverifiable, and therefore only the stuff of legend and myth. Before all the devout Christians jump on me, let me point out once again that archaeology in particular is still in the process of verifying as much of the historical things in the Bible as they can. But there's still a lot of inference, and there's still a lot of myth there. It's a very good guide for a religious belief system, but as a historical text, it's just not complete.

Bodhi - Cell 617

[This message has been edited by bodhi23 (edited 11-22-2002).]

Right you are bodhi. I agree with you there. Then again, this is not a discussion about the bible but the Ark, so . . .

I have no idea how they think that the Ark could still be around anyway. Unless, it was fossilized or something. I'm talking out of ignorance on how this could be though.

Continue on. . .

Later,
C:\


~Binary is best~

Mount Ararat is apparently pretty high up, and covered in ice and snow. So frozen, petrified, its conceivable, though unlikely, that the Ark could still be extant. Supposedly, in addition to the 8 members of Noah's family, and the many many animals, the Ark also contained an alabaster coffin that is supposed to hold the remains of none other than Adam, the first man. Now that's what I'd like to see! Quintillion year old remains... prove it to me.

The Bible is where we get the story of Noah's Ark from, that's why it's validity was questioned...

Though, to be honest, there is a major flood story in the history of almost every civilization with a history. The oldest, I think, is Sumerian. That's one the things they use to try to confirm it, that every one's talked about it forever, it must have happened. I saw a really good documentary on it on TLC a couple of months ago. They had a whole theory worked out and everything about where all the water came from... Until I started taking this class and looked at the other side of the evidence, I believed 'em! I figured if anyone could take the time to formulate that convoluted theory, they had to have something behind it. Now I know that people formulate convoluted theories all the time, regardless of the empirical evidence behind it... Until Turkey lets someone up on top of that mountain to excavate the supposed resting place, then we'll never know for sure...

Bodhi - Cell 617

quote:

---

I dont think we should take bible as historical document but as a religeous document..

---

Ruski, we really need to see it as both. While that makes it more difficult to study, it does not negate its worth

The last I had heard, the Turkey account had been disproved but I don't remember the source. I think there was some sort of massive flood but I don't believe it was global. It would not surprise me at all if there was a ship built to save some from the flood. Flood stories are very common in many ancient cultures we know of. Remember how scholars used to scoff at the idea Troy was a real place... until they actually found it

. . : slicePuzzle

well Bugs see I am religeous but see those thing that are said in the genesis cannot be trully compared scientificly like god created everything in 7 days, cmon maybe like 7 million years or something?

I know bible theaches the moral, good, and all that stuff but what does it prove that there is god....I am still puzzled and I will search the answear for the rest of my life....of coars I wont find it but still...heh just like Leo Tolstoy...I dont let my mind be conquered by what other people say...I always neet to know "why?" it is that way.

Ruski - you should investigate a course on Pseudoscience in your area. Or perhaps through an online university... Audit it if nothing else. You're a primo candidate for it!

In evaluating ideas and beliefs, there are several important things to remember. The first is that the burden of proof is on the person making the claim, and extraordinary claims always require extraordinary proof. Absence of evidence is not absence of existence. It is the claimant's job to provide the evidence to prove something DOES exist. If someone is claiming that the Ark is on top of Mount Ararat in Turkey, they need to provide hard and fast evidence to back it up. It's not our job to prove its' not there. (BTW - hadn't heard about someone proving that false yet, because of the lock down on Turkish borders, but I wouldn't be surprised.)
The next thing to remember is FALSIFIABILITY. If you cannot set up a claim to be tested in such a way that it could potentially be proven false, it cannot be considered a scientific claim. Tests must be able to prove difinitively, that a claim is true or false, in order for it to be considered scientific. Claims that involve unfalsifiable supernatural elements, cannot be falsified, and are therefore not scientific. This does not mean that they don't exist, just that no one's been able to prove it definitively yet. And case studies and testamonials are not considered evidence because they don't prove anything. Much of the ideas presented in the Bible are simply unfalsifiable. We can't prove if God had a hand in a thing or not. We can only believe that he did. Therefore, the Bible itself, cannot wholely be considered a scientific resource. But again, that doesn't mean it's NOT true, and that doesn't mean that you shouldn't believe in it. Just means we haven't proven that the supernatural force known as "God" was really responsible for the acts that are ascribed to "Him".

Bodhi - Cell 617

I think we need to organize a black ops strike team here at the Asylum to air drop into turkey and take a look at this thing they feel is worth protecting. I bet the Vatican Mafia told them to protect it to hide the fact that there isn't an ark there.

LOL - I'm just kidding for those who can't tell.


GrythusDraconis
Prince of Gold - Lord of Dragons

Just to clarify what I meant, I'm saying that there are many parts of the Bible that are unfalsifiable as bodhi23 points out. But there are other parts that are clearly historical that can, and have, been verified through scientific means. For instance, archaeologists have found the city of Jericho and the Hitites who at one time were thought to be imaginary.

Yep, Bugs, exactly! I said something to that effect a post or 2 back...

quote:

---

let me point out once again that archaeology in particular is still in the process of verifying as much of the historical things in the Bible as they can. But there's still a lot of inference, and there's still a lot of myth there. It's a very good guide for a religious belief system, but as a historical text, it's just not complete.

---

Biblical Archaeology is a thriving science. In the Holy Land, you can kick over pieces of history like pebbles in the road. There's so many layers of history in that one little swath of land - you just wouldn't believe it! Who knows what they might turn up next? No one expected the Dead Sea Scrolls either. Like I said, the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It just can't be considered scientific if it's non-falsifiable. When it's proved beyond a shadow of a doubt, the scientists will change their minds. That's how science works... Imagine if someone does actually find not only Noah's ark, but the Ark of the Covenant too! The possibility exists, we just can't call it a fact.

As an aside, my prior post was simply illustrating the process of verifying beliefs, not necessarily attacking anyone's. Bugs, I think we understand each other.

And Grythus - I wouldn't be surprised in the least!

Bodhi - Cell 617

[This message has been edited by bodhi23 (edited 11-25-2002).]

Say, I'd be up for some covert ops. I was planning on going to Thailand next month, but Turkey sounds nice too.

Cool - let's go... You bring the camera equipment, I'll get the sherpa... From what photos I've seen, we'll need one!

Bodhi - Cell 617

It'd be kind of hard to excavate something the caused anyone who touched it to die.

Oh man..so much to think about and no dollars to do it all..*L*

Hehe... um, silence? I think you're thinking of the Ark of the Covenant, not Noah's Ark.

bodhi: Sounds good. You, GD (I'm assuming here, since GD's the one who brought it up...), me, and the sherpa, with the wrath of the Turkish government at our heels, scrambling up a mountainside in the middle of winter. I can't think of any other way I'd want to spend my vacation.



ettie: Tell you what. If you want to come along, I'll pick up the tab as long as you agree to be my human shield.

Suho & GD - just remember to dress warmly and bring your trowel. No self-respecting "Ark"aeologist leaves home without one! (sorry, couldn't resist the pun this morning!)

And ettie, come on along! Just remember to bring the keg of Guinness!
Bodhi - Cell 617

[This message has been edited by bodhi23 (edited 11-27-2002).]

Always enjoy such discussions...

Assumptions seem to abound that full grown animals were put on the ark.
False presumption... No such statement is made in the Bible.

Average out the size of animals currently on the earth... even full grown... and you'll be surprised.

Dinosaurs would have been on the ark (if you really believe the Biblical account)
so many people discredit the ark on this point alone. They typically make the same presumption
that the animals (dinos too) were full grown. Falling under the same assumption mentioned above.

The average size of dinosaurs (based on fossil record) may surprise a few.

The ark wasn't a sailing vessel... it was only meant to float.
From a pure engineering standpoint one is impressed with it's accuracy & design.

Size? Plenty large enough for the task. Do the math.
Food? Ample room for storage.
Animal size? Probable that they were "infant" animals.
Predatory instincts? Not entirely developed if "infant" and easier to contain/control if developed.
Ventilation? Well... i'm sure it didn't smell good but there was plenty of fresh air.

I bore too easy... lots more could be said.

Finding the ark... well, I'm not too interested. Doesn't matter to me in the long haul.

Regards

qadash, do you think the flood in the Biblical account was global or localized?

global... no doubt.

Being one of the few inmates who has actually been to Mount Ararat I volunteer to lead the party. The Turkish goverment keeps people off the mountain for their own safety (at which point consipracy theorists stroke their chins and go 'right......') as it is pretty inhospitable there are there are some pretty nasty animals and crimimal types inhabitting the wilder parts of the area (it is real border country within striking distance of Iran and former Sovet republics).

I can tell you that it is a big mountain and to get a boat on top of it you would need an awful lot of water - which raises the question of where it all came from and where it all went again.

qadash: I fear to ask but - what evidence do you have for this?

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor