More Problems With Noah's Ark (Revelation, Allah, cross, dinosaur)

[Campbell34]

Originally Posted by MontanaGuy

Campbell34 wrote:

You keep saying that but it's not true. There is absolutely no evidence for man made objects, an overactive imagination could just as easily conclude that those rock formations are actually a depiction of The Virgin Mary.

YOUR STATEMENT IS FALSE.

The photo from 1949 has been analyzed by imaging specialist Roman Gomez who worked for the DNA, and Clifford Paiva, who was the senior physicist and satellite-imagery analyst for the U.S. Navy's Naval Surface Warfare Center. Their assessment of the anomaly's states that the anomaly's parallel and orthogonal lines of symmetry, as well as curved and circular lines of symmetry, indicate cultural ('MAN-MADE') etiology.

I'm sorry expert testimony does not agree with your worldview, but their testimony agrees with all the other eyewitiness accounts that have claimed to of actually seen the ark. Without question, there is a very large man-made object, high up on Mt. Ararat. At an altitude of 15,500 feet. And based on testimony given, this has nothing to do with an active imagination.

Ooparts & Ancient High Technology--Flood of Noah?

[MontanaGuy]

Campbell34 wrote:

I'm sorry expert testimony does not agree with your worldview, but their testimony agrees with all the other eyewitiness accounts that have claimed to of actually seen the ark. Without question, there is a very large man-made object, high up on Mt. Ararat. At an altitude of 15,500 feet. And based on testimony given, this has nothing to do with an active imagination.

There is a showboat called the General Jackson on the Cumberland River I can see from my backyard. If I went out and took a photo of this vessel it would be clearly identifiable for what it is and there would be no controversy whatsoever regarding it's authenticity. I wouldn't have to assemble a group of experts to tell me what I was looking at. It's obvious that the photo you're referring to is not instantly recognizable as Noah's Ark and there are so called experts on both sides of the debate who have completely different opinions about what it is. We see this sort of thing happening all the time with other phenomenon such as fuzzy UFO photos, men in apesuits trying to act like a bigfoot, etc. When someone can present photographic or other evidence that is so clear that we don't need experts to tell us what we're looking at then I would have a much more open mind on the subject.

[jtur88]

Forgive me if this has been mentioned before in the preceding 340 posts---I'm not going to go and look.

But, there is an order of birds (Procellaniformes) comprisint 125 species of albatrosses, petrels, etc., which never light on land. They spend every moment of their lives either on the wing or resting on the ocean,, except for breeding on remote islands. Some breed every two years, so never touch land for as much as 22 months at a time.

You know where I am going with this---why was Noah required to search the Pacific for 125 pairs of these things, figure out how to catch them, and keep them from flying away, when they could survive perfectly well for their entire natural lifetime, even if the seas flooded the land entirely and there was not a bit of dry ground?

[jbird82]

Originally Posted by jtur88

Forgive me if this has been mentioned before in the preceding 340 posts---I'm not going to go and look.

But, there is an order of birds (Procellaniformes) comprisint 125 species of albatrosses, petrels, etc., which never light on land. They spend every moment of their lives either on the wing or resting on the ocean,, except for breeding on remote islands. Some breed every two years, so never touch land for as much as 22 months at a time.

You know where I am going with this---why was Noah required to search the Pacific for 125 pairs of these things, figure out how to catch them, and keep them from flying away, when they could survive perfectly well for their entire natural lifetime, even if the seas flooded the land entirely and there was not a bit of dry ground?

Well, the Ark believers would tell you that since they could survive on their own, they aren't considered land animals and Noah had no obligation to retrieve them. But, I think you make a good point.

[jtur88]

Originally Posted by jbird82

Well, the Ark believers would tell you that since they could survive on their own, they aren't considered land animals and Noah had no obligation to retrieve them. But, I think you make a good point.

Gen. 6:19 And of every living thing of all flesh you shall bring two of every sort into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female.
20 Of the birds after their kind, of animals after their kind, and of every creeping thing of the earth after its kind, two of every kind will come to you to keep them alive.

[ShepsMom]

Just stopping by to see if anything new developed...



Nope, same old stuff



Oh well, go on, i'll check back later.....

[lwowl]

Originally Posted by ShepsMom

Just stopping by to see if anything new developed...



Nope, same old stuff



Oh well, go on, i'll check back later.....

Hey, what's that at the bottom? Freedom fries?

[Campbell34]

Originally Posted by MontanaGuy

Campbell34 wrote:

There is a showboat called the General Jackson on the Cumberland River I can see from my backyard. If I went out and took a photo of this vessel it would be clearly identifiable for what it is and there would be no controversy whatsoever regarding it's authenticity. I wouldn't have to assemble a group of experts to tell me what I was looking at. It's obvious that the photo you're referring to is not instantly recognizable as Noah's Ark and there are so called experts on both sides of the debate who have completely different opinions about what it is. We see this sort of thing happening all the time with other phenomenon such as fuzzy UFO photos, men in apesuits trying to act like a bigfoot, etc. When someone can present photographic or other evidence that is so clear that we don't need experts to tell us what we're looking at then I would have a much more open mind on the subject.

Well perhaps if you took that showboat, and buried it in a glaicer 15,500 feet near the top of Mt. Ararat, and then the Turkish government did not allow anyone to see it, it might not be that clearly identifiable. Of course, I myself would wonder why the Turkish government was getting so funny about access to that glacier in the first place, and I would wonder why all the people who had made it to that location, kept telling everyone it was a showboat.

[jbird82]

Originally Posted by Campbell34

Well perhaps if you took that showboat, and buried it in a glaicer 15,500 feet near the top of Mt. Ararat, and then the Turkish government did not allow anyone to see it, it might not be that clearly identifiable. Of course, I myself would wonder why the Turkish government was getting so funny about access to that glacier in the first place, and I would wonder why all the people who had made it to that location, kept telling everyone it was a showboat.

This is just silly...use some common sense. Don't you think if there was any supportive evidence that there was a 600 foot ark on top of a mountain that there would be great pressure on the Turkish government from scientists, religious leaders, heads of state, etc. to allow access to the mountain. It would be one of the greatest discoveries of mankind...greater than achieving our moon landing. Yet, no one seems to care except a few fringe scientists, historians, etc. Maybe this is God testing our faith again

[Campbell34]

Originally Posted by jbird82

This is just silly...use some common sense. Don't you think if there was any supportive evidence that there was a 600 foot ark on top of a mountain that there would be great pressure on the Turkish government from scientists, religious leaders, heads of state, etc. to allow access to the mountain. It would be one of the greatest discoveries of mankind...greater than achieving our moon landing. Yet, no one seems to care except a few fringe scientists, historians, etc. Maybe this is God testing our faith again

There is a great deal of supportive evidence, and there has been for years, and from non Christians as well. The problem is, there appears to be a concerted effort by the powers that be to keep this discovery under raps. It may be because of the feared effect such a discovery would have. Especially in certain areas of the world. Yet, whatever the real reasons are, it is a fact that the Turkish government will not allow anyone on the North slope of Ararat. That should tell you something right there. I spoke with a man not long ago who's group was planning to climb Ararat to that GPS fix where the Ark is believed to be, yet right at the last minute Turkey refused to allow them access. And you are right, most people don't care, and that is true of the Bible as well. A Book that makes some wild claims, yet few people take the time to consider them. When so much of the world has been convinced that the stories are all false, why take the time, or money to consider them. Only a true believer in the Bible would try to do the follow up.