For Ararat trekking / ski tours please check http://www.araratsunrises.com
Photograph by Martin Gray, National Geographic
Published April 28, 2010
But some archaeologists and historians are taking the latest claim that Noah's ark has been found about as seriously as they have past ones—which is to say not very.
"I don't know of any expedition that ever went looking for the ark and didn't find it," said Paul Zimansky, an archaeologist specializing in the Middle East at Stony Brook University in New York State.
Turkish and Chinese explorers from a group called Noah's Ark Ministries International made the latest discovery claim Monday in Hong Kong, where the group is based.
"It's not 100 percent that it is Noah's ark, but we think it is 99.9 percent that this is it," Yeung Wing-cheung, a filmmaker accompanying the explorers, told The Daily Mail.
Raw Video: Purported Site of Noah's Ark in Turkey (Courtesy Noah's Ark Ministries International)
Noah's Ark Location in Turkey a Secret
The team claims to have found in 2007 and 2008 seven large wooden compartments buried at 13,000 feet (4,000 meters) above sea level, near the peak of Mount Ararat. They returned to the site with a film crew in October 2009.
Many Christians believe the mountain in Turkey is the final resting place of Noah's ark, which the Bible says protected Noah, his family, and pairs of every animal species on Earth during a divine deluge that wiped out most of humanity.
"The structure is partitioned into different spaces," said Noah's Ark Ministries International team member Man-fai Yuen in a statement. "We believe that the wooden structure we entered is the same structure recorded in historical accounts. ... "
The team says radiocarbon-dated wood taken from the discovery site—whose location they're keeping secret for now—shows the purported ark is about 4,800 years old, which coincides roughly with the time of Noah's flood implied by the Bible.
"Noah's Ark" Wood "Way, Way, Way Too Young"
Skepticism of the new Noah's ark claim extends to at least one scholar who interprets the Bible literally.
Biologist Todd Wood is director of the Center for Origins Research at Bryan College in Tennessee, which pursues biology in a creationist framework.
As a creationist, Wood believes God created Earth and its various life-forms out of nothing roughly 6,000 years ago.
"If you accept a young chronology for the Earth ... then radiocarbon dating has to be reinterpreted," because the method often yields dates much older than 6,000 years, Wood said.
Radiocarbon dating estimates the ages of organic objects by measuring the radioisotope carbon 14, which is known to decay at a set rate over time. The method is generally thought to reach its limit with objects about 60,000 years old. Earth is generally thought to be about four and a half billion years old.
Across the board, radiocarbon dates need to be recalibrated, Wood believes, to reflect shorter time frames.
Given this perceived overestimation in radiocarbon dating, the wood the Noah's Ark Ministries International team found should have a "traditional" radiocarbon date of several tens of thousands of years if the wood is truly 4,800 years old, Wood said.
"I'm really, really skeptical that this could possibly be Noah's Ark," he added. The wood date is "way, way, way too young."
Wood thinks Noah's ark will never be found, because "it would have been prime timber after the flood," he said.
"If you just got off the ark, and there's no trees, what are you going to build your house out of? You've got a huge boat made of wood, so let's use that," he said. "So I think it got torn apart and scavenged for building material basically."
(Related: National Geographic's search for Noah's flood.)
"Noah's Ark" Found in Right Country, on Wrong Mountain?
Another reason scholars are skeptical of the latest Noah's ark discovery claim is that Genesis—the first book of the Bible—never specifies which peak the vessel supposedly landed on in Turkey.
"The whole notion is odd, because the Bible tells you the ark landed somewhere in Urartu,"—an ancient kingdom in eastern Turkey—"but it's only later that people identified Mount Ararat with Urartu," said Jack Sasson, a professor of Jewish and biblical studies at Vanderbilt University in Tennessee.
Stony Brook's Zimansky agreed. "Nobody associated that mountain with the ark" until the tenth century B.C., he said, adding that there's no geologic evidence for a mass flood in Turkey around 4,000 years ago. (See "'Noah's Flood' Not Rooted in Reality, After All?")
The Noah's Ark Ministries International explorers are "playing in a very different ballpark than the rest of us," Zimansky said. "They're playing without any concern for" the archaeological, historical, and geological records.
Better Explanations for "Noah's Ark" Structure?
Even if the Noah's Ark Ministries International team did find a wooden structure or even a boat on Mount Ararat, there are other explanations for what the structure might be.
For example, it could be a shrine constructed by early Christians to commemorate the site where they believed Noah's Ark should be, Zimansky said.
Even in that speculative case, it wouldn't be 4,000 years old. "The Bible hadn't even been written yet," he said.
Bible scholar Sasson said he thinks biblical writers intended the story of Noah's ark to be allegorical, not a true recounting of historical events. By presenting a scenario in which humanity is punished for its wickedness, "they were trying to draw us to the notion of a God who asks us to be acceptable," Sasson said.
UN to Consider "Noah's Ark"?
On its Web site, Noah's Ark Ministries International says the Turkish government plans to apply to the United Nations to put the Noah's ark discovery site on the UNESCO World Heritage list, a designation given to places of special cultural or physical significance.
But the agency hasn't received any official requests from Turkey for "the inscription of 'Noah's ark'" into the list, UNESCO spokesperson Roni Amelan said in an email.
Such a move would take time, Amelan added. "This cannot be done overnight."
The more complex, sophisticated, intricate, organized and well ordered a thing is, the greater is the likelihood that it didn't become that way by mere chance. There's far more to be said for creationism which believes that something created everything, than evolution which states that nothing created everything.
What makes you think the other two woudn't be measured the same as well, circular, surrounding two more islands. The "man" would have been set safely on the bank of the Euphrates in this verse, but not the Euphrates as we know it today.
the old argument religion versus science; is it evolution or is it adaptation; are there always tons of fossils showing one species turning into another so then were are the fossils the abundance of fossil record that Darwin said would be there. What is found is so little and up to interpretation and it is no wonder without finding the long continuous trail of fossils that modern science had to redesign, if you will, the concept of 'jumping' from one species to another without the slow 'evolutionary track' left behind in fossil record. Whatever, and geological records are no different, one only has to go to south America and see the geological record turned upside down and inside out with what would be strata hundreds of millions of years old on top of younger strata; how; flood and continental drift and tectonics all brought about at the flood. Time is only interpreted by heat and pressure to give an age if the strata is not uniform. Hence heat and pressure during the flood of essentially shuffling the continents like a deck of cards could do this. Bottom line there are two different interpretations of time and neither without solid proof of evidence to be undeniable. It takes faith to believe in either one. I for one believe the creation by God. Is the carbon in the atmosphere the same as it once was ages ago? no and science confirms that too so the degradation of carbon 14 would not be the same. Where is the fossil record of any animal transforming into a more modern species? How many animal species existed thousands of years ago when they have been going extinct by the thousands each year. How many kinds of hominids were around then that science has interpreted as being pre-human and its a proof of evolution when it is simply extinction and another species separate entirely from our own. Evidence is interpreted by minds trained to believe the interpretation must be as history of science perceives it if you want to earn your M.D or P.H.D. The same debate can be used in aging of ice in both the arctic and Antarctic regions. Simply put it takes faith to believe either. I'll bet it takes faith as an evolutionist to believe that everything in existence today some how came out of that single atom that exploded some 14.8 billion years ago called the 'Big Bang'..... I remember growing up in school back in the 60's and it was 20 billion years ago that happened....what a change in science, only off then about 5 Billion years. interesting how science changes all the time or comes up with a new way to interpret when the fossil record or evidence does not support their earlier theories , now that's evolution.
First I believe every word of the bible is true, and the problem with those not believing is that they don't understand that they cannot believe something that they don't believe. How can you accept something if you from the onset do not believe it? this makes your statement about the bible ineffective. I don't accept evolution because there is no evidence showing such changes in human life, but if the Bible tells me that God created the universe I believe it because it describe it perfectly well, for with my eyes I so see the sky, and experience day and night just as the bible has reported. Noah's was found it is real just as it was fro Israel returning home just as the bible say they would in our modern time. [Balfour agreement]
Ezekiel 36:24 (KJV) For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.
I read somewhere where they also found where the tooth fairy keeps her money. Later the same people will be going to the North Pole to look for Santa's Toy Factory....
COULD IT BE THAT GOD WANTS THIS TO REMAIN UNKNOWN? WHY WORRY ABOUT THIS? THE IMPORTANCE NOW IS THE SALVATION OF OUR SOULS, WHETHER THERE EVER WAS AN ABRAHAM, NOAH( ark) MOSES, DAVID, ETC.. JESUS ALREADY WAS BEFORE THEM!! DO NOT LET YOUR HEART BE TROUBLED
BELIEVE IN GOD! STOP ARGUING WE ARE NOT CAPABLE TO UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING LET ALONE DISCUSS AND ARGUE AMONG EACH OTHER WHO IS RIGHT OR WRONG. GOD WANTS JUST FOR US TO BELIEVE IN HIM AND LOVE EACH OTHER.
In Ezek 47:6 Son of man have you seen this? 4 rivers, all measured the same and on the fourth meaure, he is set safely on the bank of the river. In Genesis the bible talks of 4 riveheads going out of Eden. Two circle some land, islands. What makes you think the other two woudn't be measured the same as well, circular, surrounding two more islands. The "man" would have been set safely on the bank of the Euphrates in this verse, but not the Euphrates as we know it today.
Being '99.9% sure' is pretty certain! However, it would be interesting to hear how this team of evangelists and Noah's Ark advocates can explain the global fossil and DNA/genetic records of the many life forms we share the planet with.
hello, can someone put me in contact with a person or persons willing to give me 5 mins of their time to explore a pic of something I believe is man-made and possibly a location of the ark
The man who perpetuated the hoax built noahs house on the other side of the mountain. When people travelled back a year later the site of "the ark" had disintntergrated in melt water. The wooden planks were proved to be of modern origin ie the planks had been through a process of being baked. Anciets did not treat wood this way. Only in the 20th century do we do this to strengthen but also kill insects and grubs. It was also found that Noah could not have used a graphite pencil again a modern implement.
The other problem is the glacier on ararat is not that old.
They also found modern ice picks and metal nails. Again something that did not exist unless noah had access to B&Q.
The final nail in the ark that sank it was one of the fraudsters showed the international community where they built the so called ark.
It amuses me that once a matter has its roots in the Biblical, the skepticism is overcooked.
No section of the report presented the side of those who claimed to have discovered the ark to any detail or coherence including checking out their claims against what the Bible recorded about the ark.
However, the report was very forthcoming on the views of the skeptics; especially, the ones who happen to be Bible scholars.
With due respect, their views are flimsy.
One, a "creationist" (in archeology, creationists are viewed as fringe "working to the answer" scholars), says the dating doesn't conform with the creationist theory. From the point of view of "mainstream" archeology, this is flimsy and this point of view would not have been countenanced if the archaeological find didn't have Biblical roots.
The other, a non-archaeologist but a "Bible scholar" dismissed the claim because the survivors would have found it necessary to use the ark as firewood! I mean, this can, at best be termed as a personal opinion. In which case, why is there no balancing opinion from other "Bible scholars" who may hold a different opinion.
It's always amused me that the authors of these articles always note that the only expeditions that "find" the ark are religious backed. Well of course. The scientific community knows it's all a bunch of hooey. An allegory. Nothing more.
Even in that speculative case, it wouldn't be 4,000 years old. "The Bible hadn't even been written yet," he said. everything in the bible is before it was written the whole book is in passed tense so there go that idiots comment I wonder if this is the intelligence's of all these specialists
They found a text in Iraq that predates the bibles story by some couple thousand years. I don't believe a lot of Christians will quite accept it due to the possible lack of support to be accepted by the Catholic church. If you believe that the bible was designed and put together by your imaginary friend your wrong. Its a document of historical fiction and inst very consistent within its own texts.
National Geographic has never been and will never be honest about *anything at all* that is directly related to the truth of Scripture. This organization has always hated and denied God and lied about the truth of HIs Word every way they can.
Try to prove me wrong.
Now, don't show yourself to be an imbecile and pretend ad hominem fallacies are legitmate substitutes for hard, scientific evidence, confirmed by the scientific method even though you fools routinely use "scientific method" very selectively against your opponents when it's true effectiveness is against the charade that you clowns stand for.
Again, prove me wrong.
Wow. People actually believe this. Amazing. Anyone who accepts the literal meaning of the bible is nuts. These books have been roughly translated and altered for thousands of years and people are going to debate as if it is factual.
Noah's ark? You have got to be kidding me! National Geographic, you have just lost all credibility and certainly my respect. A global flood never happened. Noah's ark never happened. Thinking that anyone should treat this ancient, man made fable as having actually taken place is laughable and an insult to the intelligence of serious, critically thinking people. Your magazine is now a joke just like the made up, so-called holy book that spawned this nonsense in first place.
The article reads:
"Many Christians believe the mountain in Turkey is the final resting place of Noah's ark, which the Bible says protected Noah, his family, and pairs of every animal species on Earth during a divine deluge that wiped out most of humanity."
Just to clarify, the word "species" is not written in the Bible.
The actual word used in the Bible is "KIND"
There is a difference in meaning between the words "SPECIES" and "KIND".
If the Bible would use the word "species" that would mean that the Ark contained two tigers, two lions, two cheetas, two panthers, two pumas, etc, etc, etc...
But the Bible does NOT say the word "species" (acounting for all types of felines), rather it uses the word "KIND", (accounting for only two felines, one male, and one female... Period!
Some people may use the word "species" and the word "kind" interchangeably out of etymological ignorance... But some may be well aware of the difference, and continue to use the word speciesth the intention to deceive... But don't be fooled, the two words don't mean the same thing.
Doesn't it make sense that God took only the basic Kinds ot animals in the Ark?
And, would it really be posible to fit ALL SPECIES of animals that exist on planet earth in the Ark? Not within the specified measures.
But if we would group all the basic KINDS (NOT SPECIES) of animals in the world, we could easily pick a blue one and a pink one of each, and fit them perfectly within a smaller space than the Ark given the dimensions specified in the Bible.
This comment is meant for educational purposes only. I will not participate in any debate because the truth to this topic can be widely found.
Whoever is sincere about knowing the truth can validate what I shared in this message.
@Ben Meleck So these are true as well and should be followed?
"I permit no woman to teach or have authority over men; she is to keep silent." Timothy 2:11
"A bitched shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord." (Deuteronomy 23:2)
If in spite of this you still do not listen to me but continue to be hostile toward me, 28 then in my anger I will be hostile toward you, and I myself will punish you for your sins seven times over. 29 You will eat the flesh of your sons and the flesh of your daughters."(Leviticus 26:27-30)
"When men strive together one with another, and the wife of the one draweth near for to deliver her husband out of the hand of him that smiteth him, and putteth forth her hand, and taketh him by the secrets: Then thou shalt cut off her hand, thine eye shall not pity her." (Deuteronomy 25:11-12)
"For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him." (Leviticus 20:9)
"And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also." (Matthew 5:40)
There are so so so many more. dont be stupid.
@Ben Meleck Please don't be stupid. There is tons of evidence for evolution existing. The next time you go to read a bible, pick up a science book instead, it will do you some good.
@Ben Meleck This is some of the most backward logic and confusing use of the term "belief" I have ever seen in my life. That being said it doesn't surprise me that you don't "believe" in evolution that forms the basis for modern biology and genetics. You can not "believe" in evolution all you want but its as futile as not "believing" in gravity.
@Maria cepeda I refused to read whatever you wrote because no one takes somebody who types in all caps seriously
@Tee Pierce Many scientist are turning into religion now days, if some of them decide to look for proof of religion with since whom its to blame them. If this is true,then its not a bunch of hooey and has to be some reality to it, how can an Ark end on a mountain so far away from the ocean. Being arrogant and blind wont bring any proof or conclusion.
@Brandon Killman Either you're lying or the report is bogus. The Scriptures began being written by Moses approximately 1000 years after the flood. There is NO (read my lips) legitimate evidence that can be proved or validated that is 2000 years older than the Scriptures.
I'll repeat myself so there will be no misunderstanding and you will appreciate THE ONUS IS ON YOU TO SHOW THE PROOF because I'm telling you unequivocally that nothing 2000 years older than the Bible exists, period, at all, anywhere in the world, that can be shown to be evidence of a creation of man unless it's way down below sedimentary layers deposited by the flood. In other words, to be 2000 years older than the Bible, it must be something that would be impervious to the deterioration of 4400 + years of being buried deeply in the ground.
But, Boy! HOW I would love for something like that to be found! Wow.
Again, PROVE ME WRONG! You simply cannot.
@Gary Sellars Stop asking to be proved wrong because the burden of proof lies on your religious texts, we are simply here to "listen" or "read" your godly claims, and if you have no extraordinary evidence for your extraordinary claims, the default view is only to dismiss you as nothing except delusional
@Gary Sellars First off, I would not start and end a sentence by throwing out derogatory names when you state the ad hominem fallacy is not a legitimate means of proving your point in the same sentence. Also, I found this... (http://creation.mobi/hong-kong-ark-fiasco) Which is one of many links on the internet proving this find is a hoax. I assume Nat Geo speculated that this was the case before posting this story, which would explain the cautious title they assigned to it.
As for your first claim, I've personally never seen an article on here that has been hateful or denied god in any way. I've only seen articles that try to take an impartial view on the natural world as we observe it. If you have links to these articles, I would love to see them.
@Matthew Townsend The Bible is very unique in that it was created by many different authors over a few thousands years. No other book can match that claim. And the Dead Sea Scrolls text is almost verbatim for the Old Testament of the Bible we have today. The Bible mentioned places people didn't even know existed until the archeology proved it correct. It actually has held up well compared to other ancient classics. I suggest you read, Surprised by Faith, by Dr. Don Bierle, a skeptic and scientist who set out to prove the Bible wrong, only to discover it was right.
@Matthew Townsend actually the Bible is quite often used as a historical reference point in time because of it's accuracy. Also if you know any history of the Jews you know that there were no alternations as it was sacred to them essentially. Also there are many accurate translations from many many scholars. Please do a little research before making a comment.
Paul Roth, you should do some research of your own before you make so many bogus and Foolish allegations on something you have Absolutely no idea about. It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter. (Proverbs 25:2 KJV)) Scientists and historians have proved the Bible right so before you say you Lose all respect for the National Geographic's you need to check the facts yourself dude!! I guess the intelligence of the critical thinking people you are referring to are nothing more then.fools! Or in your case atheists! The only person who sounds like a fool is you. The holy bible, quoted by historians and scientists, for the most part is in accurate history book. The Dead Sea Scrolls lineup almost perfect with the old and New Testament. So this nonsense that you are talking about makes you sound like a complete idiot with no knowledge of history!! You must be an atheist.!
@Paul Roth Im sorry Roth but how certain are you. You are being incredibly ignorant and have lost all my respect. Im not really religious but i keep an open mind about everything, something that u seem to be have problems with.
@Paul Roth Actually as an anthropologist, a global flood is recorded in numerous societies from Mesoamerica, Asia, Middle East, etc. Civilizations thousands of miles apart at roughly the same time. No one knows why.
@Paul Roth Then how do you explain that so many ancient civilizations actually talk about a flood. Have you any evidence at all to disprove it?
@Paul Roth "Noah's ark never happened."
Wow. Really? Because you say so, huh? When people need answers, don't use the Internet, just come to know-it-all, Paul Roth, right? Knowledge rests with you; no need to for an honest search of the Internet, right?
That must be your disposition because you didn't use the Internet before you made that completely ignorant remark. How do I know that? Because, unlike you, I do use the Internet to do HONEST searches.
An honest search of the Internet would have shown you to be a lying fool. "Lying" because your claim is patently and provably FALSE but you're too unscrupulous and dishonest to SPEND THE SECONDS it takes just to do a search that would lead you to the facts to examine before opening your mouth and declaring lies as facts; "fool" because anyone who makes ignorant claims in front of others when a ten second search would give evidence to the contrary is definitely a fool who doesn't have enough self-respect to care that he makes a fool of himself in front of the whole world. Why bother to honestly search the Internet when all knowledge rests with Paul Roth?
Here's the other reason I know you're a fool. Such stupidity as I've just exposed would never happen to a man who is not a fool. Reasonable people "cover their bases."
Yet, you stupidly mouth the words of idiot atheists because you don't have enough self-respect to care whether you put your foot in your mouth and shame yourself. That's pretty pathetic.
Another lying clown too lazy to do his due diligence.
Right now, I can point you to five video documentaries that expose you as a lying fool who did, in fact put his foot in his mouth. What's really terrific is that you can access those documentaries in seconds without my help.
Yet, you haven't. Why? Because you're an ignorant fool who wants to believe lies, and not being content there, you lie to others.
But God is using you to show that His Word is true as I will reveal below.
I didn't stutter; did you notice that? Show me what a fool you are and answer me before you do any responsible research on the Internet. LOL
"He who answers a matter before he hears it, it is folly and shame to him."
That is Proverbs 18:13, which you obviously don't care was written by the man historically known as the wisest man who ever lived. He surely pegged you, though fools commonly don't have enough sense to know when their own words have put them to shame.
You could really use a year or two in the Book of Proverbs. Just substitute the time you now give listening to lying idiot atheists spew fabricated lies about their religion.
Oh. Since you are wont to "answer a matter before you hear it," I should tell you whereof I got that perspective on 'atheism as a religion'. It came directly from atheists! Here's their definition, which you can copy and paste and search for yourself: "Religion is belief without evidence." That's how I know atheism is a religion; the atheists told me! What's funny is that they're too stupid to recognize their self-condemnation!
Which is doubly funny when one considers that it's impossible to have evidence for what doesn't exist!
I'm now wondering how many years will atheists stupidly keep parroting this self-indicting "definition" before they wake up and realize that they are advertising that not only are they fools (the fool has said in his heart, "there is no god" Ps14:1) but they're announcing to the entire world that they're religious fools *while* they mock religion!
He who sits in the Heavens laughs. Ps2:4
So do I. LOL
@Jesse N. Bible is modified shape nowadays because changes have been made in it..Authentication source is QURAN and HOLY Prophet (PBUH).
Quran tell us that Ark contains specieis on each and every animal..I can give u reference if needed
@Jesse N. Neither of these words were written in the bible.
@Holden Lindsay @Ben Meleck How could the great quantities of matter found in this universe spring forth from nothing? And how did the first life begin? Could the first simple single-celled life spring forth spontaneously from dead matter? Evolutionists do not tell a gullible public the truth that even if brilliant scientists could arrange the complex organic molecules of life into a paramecium or an amoeba, there is no possible way to give this organism life. it would still be dead, and would soon decay into dust. One of the most easily proven laws of nature is the LAW OF BIOGENESIS - that life can come only from life.
@Griffin Ashley "The Science is settled!" -Al Gore (creator of the internet) Hey Griffin, if science is always correct, then why do we re-write science books every couple years? Do you really believe the Universe somehow was formed at random symmetrically? It's evolution this decade, now it's dark matter, who knows what the next theory will be. That's all your science is, "theory". Just a quick question, as you must be a scientist.... If oil and natural gas is made from dead dinosaurs and "ancient" oceans, then how is there natural gas on Saturns moon Titan? There must have been dinosaurs in space! Maybe they evolved and went there and died somehow? Idiots!
@Gary Sellars @Brandon Killman "Because I'm telling you unequivocally that nothing 2000 years older than the Bible exists, period, at all, anywhere in the world, that can be shown to be evidence of a creation of man unless it's way down below sedimentary layers deposited by the flood."
Huh. Well, there's this guy . . .
@Griffin Ashley I've read National Geographic for over 50 years and you will not find one article where National Geographic, as an organization, gives *any* credence at all to God or the Bible. Virtually everything they produce, routinely, if not continually, contradicts Scripture. They've always done this.
"I would not start and end a sentence by throwing out derogatory names." Then don't. Do whatever you want; that's your privilege.
@Remington Rogers @Matthew Townsend The bible is accurate when it comes to wars, leaders and etc like Remington said but it has been altered and edited. Many of the stories that remain in the bible were hand chosen by the crusaders while dozens of stories and books were burned and made illegal by the king. That is but a single event that altered Christianity. There are a handful of sub religions under Christianity (Presbyterian, Catholic, First Baptist, etc). Prior to the crusaders killing all other sub religions other then those endorsed by the king, there used to be dozens. It had undergone dozens of alternations because for over 2,000 years there was not one collection of stories like there is now. All of the stories were scattered and they were not uniform. Anthropologically you can find multiple versions of each story. The Catholic Church around the 13th century created a board where they went through stories and chose which ones to include. Stories are somewhat factual but not literal. They are meant for inspiration, to teach morals and values.
@Antoinette Reyes @Paul Roth lol You got one point half right. Lots of people know why. Because there was a world wide flood and as people moved around the world they told history stories. The flood of Noah is the MOST KNOWN STORY in the entire world. You can google that if someone shows you how to use a search engine.
I have to assume you don't know how to use a search engine because of all the lies you told that could have been avoided with a ten second search followed by are quick overview of headlines.
@Muhammad Faisal Wow, why do you have to use "Jewish" as a derogatory remark? Also your writing skills are terrible.
@Gary Sellars For being so religious you tend to reek of blasphemy, intolerance and rage. All things that God looks down upon. In the time of Jesus, hospitality was a prized social value which people like you lack. Maybe you need to read the Bible a few more times so you learn how to behave. You can lead someone to the river but you can not make them drink. What you do instead is scare people away from your beliefs because of your craziness. None of these comments are personal attacksw and even if they were the bible says to turn the other cheek. Yet you do the opposite and throw biased, ill-informed low blows with poor language. All you accomplish that way is displaying the insecurity and lack of confidence in your character as a terrible person who enjoys looking for fights in the most cowardly way.
How did matter spring forth?
I don't know. Neither do you.
How did life begin?
I don't know. Neither do you.
Could the first single-celled organism spring forth from dead matter?
Everything as basically made of dead matter. "Life" is just chemical reactions. So, yes. It could.
Do you have a better answer?
If you have the answers to these questions, there's a whole world waiting for you to get those answers peer-reviewed and published!
Stop pretending to know the answers to things you don't even know the first thing about.
-Sincerely: A biology major.
@Amanda-John Garza Oh dear. You sure got me with all these questions unrelated to Noah's ark.
"why do we re-write science books every couple years?" - because when we learn new things, we like other people to be able to learn it too! Thus we re-write the textbooks to include new information and keep them up to date. Wow that was a tough one.
"Do you really believe the Universe somehow was formed at random symmetrically?" - Not really sure about this one. Has anyone actually stated that the universe was formed symmetrically or do you not understand what symmetry is?
"That's all your science is, "theory"." - Well first off, you seem to be attempting to distance yourself from science by saying "your" while writing that statement on a machine designed by science, just wanted to point that out. second do you know what a scientific theory is?
- A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.
Wow that took me all of 2 seconds to Google.
"Just a quick question, as you must be a scientist.... If oil and natural gas is made from dead dinosaurs and "ancient" oceans, then how is there natural gas on Saturns moon Titan? There must have been dinosaurs in space! Maybe they evolved and went there and died somehow?" - First, not a scientist, I just have a decent education. Why is there natural gas on Titan? Technically there's not, but there are numerous quantities of hydrocarbons on Titan. I don't know enough about organic chemistry to go into detail about the differences.
"There must have been dinosaurs in space! Maybe they evolved and went there and died somehow?" - maybe you could just look up all this information yourself before you make yourself look like a dunce.
" Idiots!" - said the pot to the kettle
@Gary Sellars I think there is a reason they don't give *any* credence to the bible and that is because virtually everything science has produced contradicts Scripture.
You also seem to miss the point of me saying:
"I would not start and end a sentence by throwing out derogatory names when you state the ad hominem fallacy is not a legitimate means of proving your point in the same sentence."
You seem to think I said that only because I have some personal opinion against "derogatory names". I do, but what you left out of your response was an answer as to why you committed a fallacy while attempting to discourage others from committing the same fallacy.
You also seem to ignore everything you can't seem to provide a source for, even after you talk about an abundance of instances. You wouldn't lie about that would you?
One last thing, you seem to be a little overly... enthusiastic... to say the least. Nobody is going to take you seriously when your rambling about everybody who expresses their own opinion as an "imbecile" or "idiot" or in any way belittle others for attempting to argue their point.
@Gary Sellars You do not have to publish something in favor to express a belief in something. Just because they have not written anything that gives "credence" to Christianity, that does not necessarily mean they are against nor does it mean that they have any bias to state otherwise. PS they have had a few documentaries in favor of some bibliological stories.
@Antoinette Reyes @Remington Rogers @Matthew Townsend Huh? What King are you referring to? The Catholic Church, referred to in most history text as "The Church" through their priests (monks) translated and wrote the text down that became the bible. These monks at the time were the only ones who could read and write. Everyone else was illiterate, it being the Early Middle Ages also known as the Dark Ages after the fall of Rome. The crusaders were sent to the Holy Land by the Pope, who ordered Kings and countrymen to free Christians from persecution by the Muslims/Jews. It was a lie used to gain control and power over European countries and their armies by the Church. Muslims, Christians and Jews lived side by side in the Holy Land before the crusaders arrived without incident. The Church commissioned that the bible be written including the Jewish Torah (Old Testament) and various other texts that were chosen by the Church to form the New Testament. Many texts / stories were discarded / destroyed for varied reasons - ie: didnt follow the theology that the Church wanted expressed, the text gave a woman an authoritative position, the text contradicted another story already chosen to be included in the bible, etc.BTW, the Catholic Church is not a sub-religion to Christianity.... the Church was the first Christian religion organized by Jesus' disciple, Peter.
More Best of Archaeology 2010
The Best of 2010
For low-lying islands, what's needed is less alarmism, more planning.
Whiskey and all, the wooden dwellings of early explorers now look as they did during the first treks to the continent, thanks to a decade-long restoration effort.
When Lynsey Addario started out, journalists were respected as neutral observers. Now you can be beheaded.
The Future of Food
How do we feed nine billion people by 2050, and how do we do so sustainably?
We've made our magazine's best stories about the future of food available in a free iPad app.