Bible predictions about Noahs Ark...are true.

[Bob Carabbio]

Variety of beliefs don't move me, we are to study out His Word.

Just like thousands of "Theologians" have done for the last 2000 years. Are YOU the one who finally gets it all right???

 

[prism]

Just like thousands of "Theologians" have done for the last 2000 years. Are YOU the one who finally gets it all right???

Matthew 4:4
But he answered, "It is written, "'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.'"

 

[prism]

Yup that's the "Context" that linguistically determines the local meaning of "Yowm".

However the OEC / YEC issue predicates on the uncertainty of the chronological period between Gen 1:1, and Gen 1:2.

IOW... speculation.

 

[CrowCross]

You're the one claiming this is ark.

After presenting evidence that a boat like structure has been found where the bible predicts one should be...I asked if it isn't a

If aluminium metal wasn't successfully extracted until 200 years ago, then yes this would be the reason why people of Noah's time couldn't have made the alloy.

The point is...we don't know what technology Noah had. We do know he had the technology to build a real big boat.

I simply asked.....if it's not Noahs Ark...what is it?

 

[CrowCross]

I think the artcle @TB2 posted answers your question.

To be honest I found the article to be unconvincing.

Having all of those just right natural geological features....in the right places...such as natural wall like structures where they should be....metal that's not metal but rather being a "rock" where they should be...natural synclines in the perfect spot just the right size and shape....every aspect of this multideminsonal feature that has many aspects of a large boat just where they should be...just so happens to be natural? ....Nothing to see here. Move on.

You need a bit more than Lorence Gene Collins claiming the features were natural....to really explain away what was found.

 

[TB2]

To be honest I found the article to be unconvincing.

Having all of those just right natural geological features....in the right places...such as natural wall like structures where they should be....metal that's not metal but rather being a "rock" where they should be...natural synclines in the perfect spot just the right size and shape....every aspect of this multideminsonal feature that has many aspects of a large boat just where they should be...just so happens to be natural? ....Nothing to see here. Move on.

You need a bit more than Lorence Gene Collins claiming the features were natural....to really explain away what was found.

You may not believe it but I'm trying to help you, not simply win an argument. There are false claims that will simply make you look bad and will cause you to lose credibility. Even Young Earth Creationists reject this. Even Ken Ham's Answers in Genesis rejects this. See Answers in Genesis article 1 and article 2. If you don't believe me, at least believe them. Even AiG says it's wrong. Here's Answers in Genesis statement on it (and the links above give more thorough treatment):

The Main Claims at a Glance​

True/False?​

• Radar shows man-made (boat) structure……….FALSE
• There is a regular metallic pattern…………FALSE
• Lab tests show petrified laminated wood……..FALSE
• Turkish scientists found metal rods…………FALSE
• Metal artefacts have been proved by lab……..FALSE
• There are ‘ship’s ribs’ showing…………….FALSE
• There is lots of petrified wood…………….FALSE
• Turkish Commission says ‘it’s a boat………..FALSE

 

[CrowCross]

You may not believe it but I'm trying to help you, not simply win an argument. There are false claims that will simply make you look bad and will cause you to lose credibility. Even Young Earth Creationists reject this. Even Ken Ham's Answers in Genesis rejects this. See Answers in Genesis article 1 and article 2. If you don't believe me, at least believe them. Even AiG says it's wrong. Here's Answers in Genesis statement on it (and the links above give more thorough treatment):

The Main Claims at a Glance​

True/False?​

• Radar shows man-made (boat) structure……….FALSE
• There is a regular metallic pattern…………FALSE
• Lab tests show petrified laminated wood……..FALSE
• Turkish scientists found metal rods…………FALSE
• Metal artefacts have been proved by lab……..FALSE
• There are ‘ship’s ribs’ showing…………….FALSE
• There is lots of petrified wood…………….FALSE
• Turkish Commission says ‘it’s a boat………..FALSE

It's interesting that you would agree with the conclusion but deny their statement.....There is an enormous amount of evidence for creation and the Flood, so we don’t need the Ark to be discovered in that sense.

The articles mentioned...

These walls, in places standing 20-30 feet (69 metres) sheer above the immediately surrounding terrain, certainly give the impression of the outer hull of a boat.

Other statements such as.."Briefly, the rock formation has a rather streamlined shape. It is of a size consistent with the biblical dimensions given,"

It is also true that the samples contained iron, aluminum, titanium and carbon,

It is certainly true that samples found on the site has returned assays of around 90% iron oxides. One of these samples appeared to be roughly in the shape of a right angle

. Three independent assay laboratories are then cited as the proof of an unusual metal content in the ‘fossil rivet’,

A number of large rock slabs found across the valley within sight of the boat formation are so-called drogue stones which were used to steer or anchor vessels. Their proximity to the site suggests that they could well have been giant anchor stones used by Noah to steer the Ark and keep it facing the wind.


.......you should be getting the point by now....the odds of finding all these boat like features at one place is astronomical....but of course, they're all natural. Wyatt made some incredable discoveries. He investigated a boat like anomaly in the mountain where the bible said one should be....and it's 100% natural. Imagine that.

They asked..."Then how could this rather convincing looking boat-shape have been produced by natural means at this site, "

It's amazing that AIG built a replica of the ark in Kentucky....then when presented with evidence of a boat in the mountains where the bible said it should be....can't be true.

 

[TB2]

It's interesting that you would agree with the conclusion but deny their statement.....There is an enormous amount of evidence for creation and the Flood, so we don’t need the Ark to be discovered in that sense.

The articles mentioned...

These walls, in places standing 20-30 feet (69 metres) sheer above the immediately surrounding terrain, certainly give the impression of the outer hull of a boat.

Other statements such as.."Briefly, the rock formation has a rather streamlined shape. It is of a size consistent with the biblical dimensions given,"

It is also true that the samples contained iron, aluminum, titanium and carbon,

It is certainly true that samples found on the site has returned assays of around 90% iron oxides. One of these samples appeared to be roughly in the shape of a right angle

. Three independent assay laboratories are then cited as the proof of an unusual metal content in the ‘fossil rivet’,

A number of large rock slabs found across the valley within sight of the boat formation are so-called drogue stones which were used to steer or anchor vessels. Their proximity to the site suggests that they could well have been giant anchor stones used by Noah to steer the Ark and keep it facing the wind.


.......you should be getting the point by now....the odds of finding all these boat like features at one place is astronomical....but of course, they're all natural. Wyatt made some incredable discoveries. He investigated a boat like anomaly in the mountain where the bible said one should be....and it's 100% natural. Imagine that.

They asked..."Then how could this rather convincing looking boat-shape have been produced by natural means at this site, "

It's amazing that AIG built a replica of the ark in Kentucky....then when presented with evidence of a boat in the mountains where the bible said it should be....can't be true.

You are correct. I do reject a lot of what Answers in Genesis has to say, and find it inaccurate and untrustworthy. But *you* accept AiG as a credible source. So if you're not going to listen to me, you should at least listen to them. They're at least trying to provide creationists with what they believe are the best most credible arguments, and trying to help creationists avoid the claims that aren't credible or that at minimum are not solid, slam dunk cases.

 

[CrowCross]

You are correct. I do reject a lot of what Answers in Genesis has to say, and find it inaccurate and untrustworthy. But *you* accept AiG as a credible source. So if you're not going to listen to me, you should at least listen to them. They're at least trying to provide creationists with what they believe are the best most credible arguments, and trying to help creationists avoid the claims that aren't credible or that at minimum are not solid, slam dunk cases.

The claim is there is a boat buried in the Mountains of Ararat. If it's not a boat it sure looks like one...so much so many have identified it as a boat.
AiG is being very cautious. In fact too cautious.

When you call your case a solid slam dunk all I can do is laugh at you.

There is more to this than you think....but you presenting atheist material, must still deny.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

Matthew 4:4
But he answered, "It is written, "'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.'"

True - and?? Are You the one who inderstands everything perfectly??

 

[Bob Carabbio]

IOW... speculation.

What part of "Uncertainty" didn't you get????

 

[prism]

True - and?? Are You the one who inderstands everything perfectly??

Although we may not understand everything perfectly, it still doesn't relieve us of the duty to feed on God's Word, hence...

Matthew 4:4
But he answered, "It is written, "'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.'"

 

[prism]

What part of "Uncertainty" didn't you get????

Ditto, what part of IOW didn't you get?

 

[TB2]

The claim is there is a boat buried in the Mountains of Ararat. If it's not a boat it sure looks like one...so much so many have identified it as a boat.
AiG is being very cautious. In fact too cautious.

When you call your case a solid slam dunk all I can do is laugh at you.

There is more to this than you think....but you presenting atheist material, must still deny.

Ugh, not Ron Wyatt. He is one of the most disreputable (along with Carl Baugh) that even leading YEC organizations are embarrassed to be associated with. Not credible information. I'm just trying to help. Even though I disagree with YEC, I still pointed you in the direction of more credible YECs like Kurt Wise and Ken Coulson. Stick with the top notch scientists. But, hey, it's your choice. See the new thread and what Creation International says about Ron Wyatt.

In Creation .com 's first list, about seventh bullet point from the bottom of that first list are links to what Creational International has to say about Ron Wyatt

 

[EarlyActs]

That one in particular is just a natural, geologic formation. Like that face that was seen on Mars that just turned out to be shadows and rocks formations

I think the previous question was about the metallurgy claim not the whole account. There are lots of accounts of bizarre technology from before the cataclysm. There is a sledge hammer from the Midlands UK that is 3x a normal human size.

The overall account does not hinge on locating it. The question is: what hydrologic conditions and event are involved in ‘the fountains of the great deep were broken open.’ And is that the same as “mega-flora was suddenly encased in mile-deep ice” in Alaska, or the 10K mammoths fleeing the same direction from ‘loess’—German for blowing ice and sand? They suffocated, standing, walking, etc. Or the opisthotonics of ‘dinosaur’ island in the Rockies. Or why S American tribes know of Cox-Cox who put his family and animals on a boat and rode out a storm.

I believe the Bible but I believe in reading it in its context. The flood was a real event but I have no idea when it happened. I also believe that the account makes deliberate use of hyperbole to get the author's theological point across. But for argument's sake, let's say that a wooden boat that size was found, and proven to be Noah's ark, it wouldn't change the way I read the passage. In the same way, if the earth was proven to be only 6000 years old, it wouldn't change the way I read Genesis 1.

However, you need a lot more evidence than it looks boat shaped and is in the Ararat Mountain region before you can say it is Noah's ark.

There are areas near Ararat where the traditional name is the ‘place of Noah’s ark.’

 

[TB2]

The overall account does not hinge on locating it.

Agreed

The question is: what hydrologic conditions and event are involved in ‘the fountains of the great deep were broken open.

No, because those are modern geological ideas we can't impose on the text. Error of anachronism

 

[EarlyActs]

Agreed

No, because those are modern geological ideas we can't impose on the text. Error of anachronism

On the latter you missed the question. We have an event and we have a result. What were the hydrological conditions?

 

[TB2]

On the latter you missed the question. We have an event and we have a result. What were the hydrological conditions?

That's what I meant by anachronism, my friend. Hydrological conditions is anachronistically reading back into the text modern scientific concerns. We read fountains of the deep and think plate tectonics, while in biblical times they associated the deep with the primeval waters of chaos from which creation was ordered and differentiated.

That said, the fossil record evidence contradicts theories of hydrological sorting and ecological zonation. For example, slow growing stromatolites and reefs globally distributed throughout the fossil record with the most massive enormous reefs in the middle to upper fossil record and smaller reefs at the bottom--the opposite of what hydrological sorting and ecological zonation predict.

One of hundreds of contradictions

 

[CrowCross]

Ugh, not Ron Wyatt. He is one of the most disreputable (along with Carl Baugh) that even leading YEC organizations are embarrassed to be associated with. Not credible information. I'm just trying to help. Even though I disagree with YEC, I still pointed you in the direction of more credible YECs like Kurt Wise and Ken Coulson. Stick with the top notch scientists. But, hey, it's your choice. See the new thread and what Creation International says about Ron Wyatt.

In Creation .com 's first list, about seventh bullet point from the bottom of that first list are links to what Creational International has to say about Ron Wyatt

I would think any creationist scientist would love to have investigated and done the research on things Ron Wyatt participated in.

Imagine exploring the Exodus and the Red Sea....Climbing arount Mt Ararat...checking out Mt Sinai...Investigating Sodom and Gomora...Pyramids...Searching for the Ark of the Covenant.....and you have the to bad mouth him.

 

[TB2]

I would think any creationist scientist would love to have investigated and done the research on things Ron Wyatt participated in.

Imagine exploring the Exodus and the Red Sea....Climbing arount Mt Ararat...checking out Mt Sinai...Investigating Sodom and Gomora...Pyramids...Searching for the Ark of the Covenant.....and you have the to bad mouth him.

I would love to do what he did. I would love it if it were true. Ron Wyatt was a seventh day adventist. I earned my paleontology degree under seventh day adventist YEC geologists. For three years I heard seventh day adventists lament Ron Wyatt and how much he was giving YECs and seventh day adventists a bad name. The "Sodom and Gomorrah" he discovered is nothing but a geologic rock formation.

Consider that Wyatt was a nurse anesthetist with no training in archaeology or geology who YEC geologists have denounced and Answers in Genesis called his discoveries fraudulent. See ICM link about his claims

Consider how many have searched for all these same things without any success, but Ron Wyatt singlehandedly discovers virtually everything. Discovered

-Sodom and Gomorrah
-Noah's Ark
-Discovered the "real" Mt Sinai
-Discovered the "real" exact point where Israelites crossed Red Sea
-Discovered Pharaoh's chariot wheel from the Red Sea
-Discovered the "real" site of Jesus's crucifixion
-Discovered the Ark of the Covenant (in a cave directly underneath where Jesus was crucified)
-In that same cave discovered blood spots that he claimed DNA analysis proved was blood from a person born of a virgin

Amazing how one person could discover all these things that others have searched a millenia for