Hello, I hope that you are all doing well today. I want to know what your opinion is about the discovery of Noah's Ark on Mount Ararat? Let me elaborate: in the 1950's a frenchman named Ferdinand Aranzo(?) and his son, climbed Mount Ararat in an expidition to find the Ark. At that time they found some wood, but not the entire Ark. Ferdinand had the wood tested to see how old it was. The wood was 5,000 years old, also it was a type of wood that had never before been in that region. Since then, there have been many expeditions by dozens of people on Mount Ararat. It is believed by many people, a lot of these being in the scientific community that the Ark is hidden in a volcanic peak bordering Iran and the Former Soviet Empire at Mt. Ararat. A chineseman and his crew believed that they walked into the Ark, when they made a tunnel and crawled through it on one of their expeditions. When they crawled inside, they came into a wooden room, with cages. So without going on and on,
2007-08-21 02:58:47 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
What do you think about this?
2007-08-21 02:59:05 · update #1
I think you're trying to sell a load of manure bigger than the mythical ark:
"In 1955 French explorer Fernand Navarra reportedly found a 5-foot wooden beam on Mount Ararat some 40 feet under the Parrot Glacier on the northwest slope and well above the treeline. The Forestry Institute of Research and Experiments of the Ministry of Agriculture in Spain certified the wood to be about 5,000 years old. A claim that is disputed by Radio Carbon dating -- two labs have dated the 1969 samples, one at 650 C.E. +/- 50 years, the other at 630 C.E. +/- 95 years.[25] Navarra's guide later claimed the French explorer bought the beam from a nearby village and carried it up the mountain.[23] "
2007-08-21 03:08:41 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 9⤊ 0⤋
this account of discovery of the Ark has been not been proven, from what i have heard and read.
now, they are not even sure if they are looking at the right mountain - Ararat may not have been the place where the Ark landed.
the group from China has been debunked as well, i do believe.
there is a great National Geographic program from a few years ago about the Ark. I am trying to remember what, if any, conclusions they were able to draw.
2007-08-21 10:18:25 · answer #2 · answered by yarn whore 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Ok so your question is - what do you think about the finding ofa part of a random boat that can not be proven to be noahs ark being found up a volcano, which also can not be proven as to its origin . ie could have been planted there . yes the wood was 5000 years old (allegedly) but that does not prove it is the ark.
Im not sure that christians understand this, but SHOCK , i beleive that jesus existed. yes i do. but was he the son of some fictional deity that raped mary, without her knowing, definately no.Jesus was a decent guy that opened a few doors for people and was basically an old time protestor against oppression. To this end, the same logic can be applied here.Could there have been a boat with lots of animals in owned by a guy named noah who wanted to start a zoo for ppl in the east whose remains were planted up a volcano to start mass hysteria . quite possibly. was noah told to do this by your 'god' - hell no
2007-08-21 10:17:02 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
This is information that is taken out of context. There is nothing scientific about this discovery and it's relation to the myth of Noah's Ark, which even if it wasn't a myth still wouldn't prove the existence of god. What they did was find some material that coincided with the story and, my sweet lovely darling, causality not coincidence is needed for proof.
2007-08-21 10:06:29 · answer #4 · answered by Officer Uggh 3 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Show me the chunk of 5000 year old wood that had never been in the region before, and we can start talking. Otherwise, it sounds like BS. Ron Wyatt claimed to have discovered the ark as well, but all he really found were a bunch of rocks in a loose boat like shape.
2007-08-21 10:05:56 · answer #5 · answered by wondermus 5 · 5⤊ 0⤋
*ahem*
Actually what has been found has never been substantiated. They can't get to in a way that would prove anything. It's frozen solid and they can't access enough to test anything.
Also it isn't thought that Noah may have never existed or THOUGHT the entire world flooded. It is not unusual for the entire place to flood out and if he was not aware of how big the world was, he would assume that the entire world had been flooded.
This is meant to be metaphorical and its a borrowed myth. The Greeks had the EXACT same story just different names
2007-08-21 10:07:24 · answer #6 · answered by ~Heathen Princess~ 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
I've heard about this....I also heard of the possibility that the Ark was just planted there by that Ferdinand, and that it was a fake. But, regardless, it doesn't prove the Bible factual as much as you would think; as that story was derived from an earlier Sumerian myth.
2007-08-21 10:06:17 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
Pieces of 5000 year-old wood is not unusual. You can imagine anything you care to.
If the Chinese story was at all believable, there would have been scientists and religious leaders by the millions examining , testing, and photographing every tiny speck. The fact that it got no or little mention tells you something.
2007-08-21 10:12:56 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
If Noah's ark was *really* discovered, don't you think you'd see it a lot more in books and magazines? Or at least *real* websites like say National Geographic, BBC, etc. Or at least Wikipedia?
2007-08-21 10:08:48 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 0⤋
LOL
Are you familiar with the term 'pious fraud'?
Here's a tip... whenever you hear some ridiculous story like this, go to Google, and type...
debunk: noah's ark
debunk: parting the red sea
debunk: dinosaur human footprints
etc.
.
2007-08-21 10:14:44 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋