Noahs' Ark- Better than New?

That's not a marine survey, it's just an exercise in self delusion worthy of von Danekin and his UFO cult, and since when does a visitors center make something a fact !

The fact is that there is a geological formation, (inspected by geologists who said it was clearly a natural and common geological formation), It's vaguely ship shaped. The rest is pure speculation. It's all spurred on with the usual dishonesty and spin when the fundamentalist new Earthers get involved. These same people were also fervent flat Earthers the generation before.

 

The 240 deg rotation was mentioned in the Marine Survey link earlier, which I am assuming is based upon thier findings which line up real nice with what I see. But interestingly, the satellite photo I believe was prior to the earthquake "daysail" to her current anchorage.

 

Aw come on Boston,
Can't you see that nice wake she is cutting.....in the dirt?

 

We must try to remember who wrote the thousands of stories and texts, that were considered for the bible. The vast majority where not included and the ones that remained almost believable, with just the right mix of hope and fire and brimstone got included, as the official old and new testament garnishes. Considering Job made it, I can only imagine the hell fury wrathed upon some poor sucker, to test their faith in God story, that didn't make the eventual good book cut. Regardless of this bit of humanistic dribble, people wrote the books of the bible folks, not God.

As such, it's interesting enough for those that do believe, but don't accept that thousands of scriptures aren't included in the "abridged" version of the bible, the story of Noah and his ark was written by man. Yep good old folks, that at the time suggested everything was wiped out, from the 40 days and 40 nights rain thing. See what they didn't realize was that fish wouldn't really mind all that much if you pissed in their pond for a month and a quarter. They'd look up and say "Is that all you got . . .". Fish can swim and more importantly breath under water, even if it's raining. Unfortunately, this and many other tidbits are strewn all over the bible and other religious texts.

Unless of course it was one of those special, God induced big cats and dogs kind of rain. Now there could be an issue, with 40 days and 40 nights of canine and feline bodies choking up the water ways of the word, but there's no mention of this, as I'm sure the floating fur balls of soggy Rottweilers and cheetahs, would have made enough of a visual impact to warrant mentioning in the good book, even if they were only tabbies and Chihuahuas. Since these people weren't bright enough to mention the millions of former pet carcasses, flowing past their soon to be flooded living rooms and the idea that all didn't die as suggested, because fish can swim, well you have to make some fairly reasonable conclusions. You see, back then 5,500 or so years for the age of the earth was a realllllllly long time to them. What I like best about all of this is, in the early 20th century, the Catholic church finally admitted that fish could swim and breath under water and they probably or possibly (can't remember which) did survive the great flood. Knowing the Catholics as I do, it has to be possibly, if for no other reason then to offer an escape route if necessary in the future.

As for the ark, pleeeeease. I'm reminded of second grade, where the teacher (in my case a nun) whispered something in the ear of the student in the front row and the isle next to the door, told to repeat the story to the person behind, etc., etc., etc. until it got to the end of the class. The two stories differed dramatically when recited aloud and this is precisely what happened with the biblical texts folks. These stories were told for countless generations before being written down, then eventually converted into a text worthy of inclusion into the good book. Every sort of embellishment imaginable was incorporated into these "stories", writer's style and personal revisions included as well.

Though possibly somewhat based in a truth, the vast majority of these texts are the congerings and ramblings of overly active minds, lastly, considering how they lived, very likely lead poisoned and drug induced minds too.

 

The whole story of Noah's Ark has to be an unacknowledged miracle, the vessel is built and held together by magic, the animals are gathered and kept alive by magic, the water arrives and departs by magic, the vessel survives the savage ocean through magic to finally magically distribute it’s contents uniquely around the globe.

Contrary magic is then applied to order the sedimentary evidence, the fossil and ice core records and many other aspects of the physical world so they all appear to disagree with the myth………… All makes perfect sense doesn’t it?

We haven't even touched on the moral question of the actions being foisted on a just and loving god with all that magical power to spare. Couldn't that god have found a better solution than mass murder? Maybe sent a few angels to have a chat? Why was that god so coy when so much was at stake? Why does the god of the old testament so often appear to have a personality disorder?

The biggest contradiction of all in the Bible is the glaring discrepancy between the old and the new testament god. One is hard harsh and cruel and the other is tempered by Greek philosophy and humanism, loving caring and kind. Apparently it's the evolution of god from a limited tribal deity to an omnipotent caring being.

You should look past the stories and consider a critical analysis of what is actually being portrayed, is it an allegorical educational tale, or the act of a despotic maniacal deity. To be a biblical fundamentalist is to paint a very poor picture of the biblical god. Petty Vain, vengeful, murderous. A lot of Christians I know are quite offended by biblical littoral fundamentalism for this reason.

 

sorry I dont see anything resembling a wake nor do I see any evidence of rotation or structure beyond a natural formation or maybe if you really stretch it a defensive dike or a neolithic village.

the so called marine survey fails to present any evidence that the feature is anything but a natural geological structure

I am curious if the church no accepts carbon dating as a viable tool though

 

Then disprove it.

 

How does one prove a boat never existed?

 

So you would ride the slide all the way down. What's the advantage?

 

Von Danekin lied?

 

You are aware of the sequel from the person who performed and interpreted the scans?

 

[SIZE=+1]Faith is a cop-out. It is intellectual bankruptcy. If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits.[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]-Dan Barker, author and former evangelist[/SIZE]

 

ok
while I seldom follow Creation magazine there have been numerous articles refuting the claims of this site being anything other than a geological formation
from
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v14/i4/report.asp

another interesting article begins with
from
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/802106--is-the-latest-noah-s-ark-discovery-a-fake

the list of sites debunking this site as the lost ark of Noah is endless
from
http://www.creationtips.com/notark.html

the weight of evidence against is overwhelming

simply put
many religions teach principals through mythological constructs
doesn't make those stories true
it just means its a tool of religion to "enlighten" its followers

cheers
B

 

If we were standing on the ground looking up at her fine 200 foot overhang there wouldn't be a whole lot of conversation...we would all be to awestruck with the sight of perfect beauty. We would have to call the medic for old man Herreschoff....he would need oxygen after experiencing the awe of the Ark.

 

I'd be really curious as to how you might explain other similar formations in the area

how many arks were there