Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The flood would of dramatically changed the weather patterns, your arguement was the mountain was covered in ice. Right after the flood, I don't believe that was the case. And there is no question that God was fully in control of the events, because the Bible tells us, it was God Himself who sealed the Arks door.
When is it going to sink in that regarding this story, the bible is flat out wrong...Some things are just not possible....This is one of those things.
rifleman, do you really believe weather conditions are the same today, as they were thousands of years ago?
Possibly, but not likely. After all, the world was covered with water following a physically and atmospherically impossible storm event. 6 inches AN HOUR is impossible. 6 inches in 24 hours is a downright deluge, leading to massive flooding. It's not possible for the atmosphere to carry that much water, even if a magical half of it came from those impossible deep caverns that you claim existed before but no-one can find now. But even if it did bubble up from non-existant caverns in the ocean floor, the resulting impact on atmospheric conditions would be staggering. Lots of violent storms with vicious winds (and remember, you maintain that god evaporated all that water by winds. They'd be howling winds, where even a cockroach couldn't stand up!). Remember; it's a known atmospheric fact that land masses, forests and mountains slow down the wind. You just eliminated all those barriers!
So, at the top of a mountain peak, yes, I do believe that conditions were more extreme then. Mountain peaks focus winds, since they're the only thing sticking up into the atmosphere. Get it? Like every single mountain on Earth today, winter or summer, desert or Arctic. All same. Windy as h$ll! You're suggesting, without any historical evidence or even ambiguous biblical documentation, that it was balmy, warm, ice-free and hospitable on that tiny top? And that, in addition, there was enough food for 600 million vegetarian beasts to wait it out for another few months??
Have you called Comedy Central TV and told them about your act, Tom? You'll have 'em rolling in the aisles, I'm tellin' yah!
And if the Ark of Noah was a dead horse, they would not of found a large petrified wooden structure 13,000 feet high up on the very Mountain where God said the Ark landed.
Here we go again, friends. A "STRUCTURE"??? While a New Zealand team is going to check out a possible 'artifact" under the ice, and the Ertugrul Tourist Association pseudo-expedition (with rich Chinese tourists in tow) found a piece of wood up there, left by the receding flood, Tom here tells us, yet again, with complete confidence,, that there IS now a petrified wooden STRUCTURE up there.
No-one else has claimed this, Tom.
Boy, what ARE you going to say when/if someone credible ever goes up there and finds nothing?
BTW, God didn't say it: some biblical authors, who'd read a remarkably similar story from previous Greek authors, copied and wrote it down.
No matter how much you want the Ark story to go away, the truth will come out.
I don't "want it to go away". It already sailed, hit a bunch of logical technical icebergs, and sank while you were adjusting your deckchair.
And the Ark will be found.
I thought you just said it was found.... You are a bit confusing at times...
Stay tuned, friends, for more of the same revisionist, false science denialism.....
I'm impressed. I don't know how you manage to come up with such amazing websites. The model of the Ark is stunning. I assume the toy train set and the house in front of the model are to help better visualize how large the Ark must've been, even though I'm not sure the scale is close. The house in front looks pretty dinky.
The ramp looks like it might be a bit too short. It's hard to guess how the animals would manage to get up to it. If the ramp were long enough to reach the ground, then there'd be no problem for the animals to climb up it, but how would you manage to close it? It'd be too long for the doorway. Perhaps there was a detached ramp built next to the Ark with the door dropped down across the detached ramp? Well, that'd allow the door way to be closed. Problem is when the Ark finally landed, there'd be no detached ramp available. Everyone and everything would have no way to get off the Ark.
And I wonder, if the Ark had three decks, how did Noah manage to get the animals down to those two lower decks? If there wer openings between the decks with ramps built inside, that might work, but it would waste valuable space. Remember, this was a mission to preserve pairs of all the animals in the world.
If the model of the Ark depicts how it actually looked, then the row of windows at the top would work out well to ventilate the upper deck. I'm not sure about the two lower deck though. Regardless, considering it rained for 40 days and 40 nights, those windows would have to be closed the entire time to keep the rain out from flooding the interior of the Ark. Sure, later on, when the rain stopped, the vents could be opened, but during the 40-day rain, it'd get pretty ripe smelling inside. In fact, the smell of ammonia from all the urine could reach high levels stinging the eyes and very hard to breathe. The powerful stench from the decks below is going to rise up to the upper deck. It could kill potentially kill you. And what would you do with all that wet sloppy poo? You can't exactly open the door to dump it out for at least 40 days and 40 nights.
Okay, enough of that, let's scroll down the Dial-A-Prayer page to where it says "Unverified Noah's Ark News". This News is about the 2007 Chinese-Turkish team. The writer of Dial-A-Prayer states: "Be aware that this story could be a hoax."
Now let's go back to the top of the Dial-A-Prayer page. There's a link to "The Chapel of Marlboro" in Hartsville Ohio. This is where the Ark model (in the photo) is located. Just above it you'll find "Noah's Ark News" and a link to TVNZ news website. The article dated March 13, 2008, is about a New Zealand firm, Global Intelligence Solutions, who decided to help determine if something is buried under the ice on Mt. Ararat. But there's something else mentioned in that article: a U.S. team believes satellite images show a 300 meter long ship is buried under the ice. Noah's Ark hunt gets help from New Zealand firm | TECHNOLOGY News
Okay, I tool the liberty to look at another website called "Genesis Files". They have a page with some images that look pretty much the same as the photo of the Ark model on display at The Chapel in Marlboro in Hartville, Ohio. Scroll down the page until you reach "Size of Noah's Ark". What you'll find are the length, width and height of the Ark based on what's written in the Bible. It shows that the length of the Ark is about 133 to 157 meters long. (436 to 515 feet long) But yet both the Dial-A-Prayer website and the TVNZ news article say that a U.S. team believe it's 300 meters long (984 feet long)! That's twice as long as the Biblical account! Genesis Files
Now, take another good look at the photo of the model and the Genesis Files images (especially the dimensions part). Do you really think pairs of every animal, bird, etc., would fit in there, even with three levels? Take this into account: go back and read the Biblical account of the Ark. It wasn't just a pair of each kind of animal. 7 pairs of clean animals were taken aboard. It was the unclean animals that were only taken in pairs. In effect, there's even more than just a pair of every kind of animal. The number starts to become pretty staggering! Now think about the dinosaurs. Evidently, many of them must've been considered a clean, especially if there were stegosaurs wandering around Cambodia as recent as 600-900 years ago where people saw them. So there would have been a huge number of dinos on board as well. Looking at the general size of the Ark, do you really think ALL those animals, including dinosaurs, would be able to fit into it?
I'm not saying you should just toss the story of Noah's Ark in the trash. There's a moral to the story. Too many people are making too many claims that the Ark is here, the Ark is there, no, it's somewhere else, it's broken in two pieces, no, it's in four pieces, parts are hidden in caves, it's submerged in a lake, it's buried under ice, part of it is sticking out on a ledge, it's laying on it's side, etc. Not one of these tales has ever been conclusively proven. If it really is there, then someone would have reached it by now. There would be thousands of crystal clear photos and videos of it. All that is shown are blurred photos and videos of dark shapes. It may be that people are only chasing after imaginary shadows.
The Bible clearly tells us, that the Ark of Noah, landed on the highest mountain, of the mountains of Ararat. In my own personal life I have discovered, that the God of the Bible sometimes does things that others would think impossible. And Noah's Ark, just happens to be one of those things. God does not tell stories that are untrue, and Jesus Christ Himself confirmed the reality of the flood of Noah. We have very detailed accounts of the Arks existance on Mt. Ararat. Of course, most people do not want to believe those accounts, because they don't want to believe the Bible. The mountain is covered in heavy snow and ice most of the time. Yet on those rare occasions when the ice melts, that is when we start to hear of the accounts of the Ark being there. The story in the Bible, is not just a moral story, it is a real account of what occured in our ancient past. Noah's Ark, is still on the mountain.
The link below gives at least five accounts of those who reported seeing the Ark of Noah on Mt. Ararat. There are numerous other links that speak of their accounts, and the accounts of others in greater detail.
The Bible clearly tells us, that the Ark of Noah, landed on the highest mountain, of the mountains of Ararat. In my own personal life I have discovered, that the God of the Bible sometimes does things that others would think impossible. And Noah's Ark, just happens to be one of those things. God does not tell stories that are untrue, and Jesus Christ Himself confirmed the reality of the flood of Noah. We have very detailed accounts of the Arks existance on Mt. Ararat. Of course, most people do not want to believe those accounts, because they don't want to believe the Bible. The mountain is covered in heavy snow and ice most of the time. Yet on those rare occasions when the ice melts, that is when we start to hear of the accounts of the Ark being there. The story in the Bible, is not just a moral story, it is a real account of what occured in our ancient past. Noah's Ark, is still on the mountain.
The link below gives at least five accounts of those who reported seeing the Ark of Noah on Mt. Ararat. There are numerous other links that speak of their accounts, and the accounts of others in greater detail.
WOW, Campbell, that has absolutely nothing to do with what I posted. I'm not talking about what the Bible claims. I'm talking about what people claim.
The Dial-A-Prayer link YOU provided, and the TVNZ link which DAP provided, both posted about an Ararat anomoly (as seen by satellite) that a boat-like shape is believed by a U.S. group of Ark-searchers believes it to be the Ark. The length of the shape is estimated to be nearly 1,000 feet long. The dimensions as specified by the Bible puts the length of the Ark at only half that size. If the shape was the Ark, and is 1,000 feet long, AND the Ark is broken in two to four pieces as Ed Davis and Abas claim, then the Ark would have to be even longer, perhaps 2,000 feet to perhaps a half mile long.
The point is that everyone including their cats and dogs are making all sorts of wild claims. There are claims of it being in all sorts of completely different locations (including different countries), and claims that it's in all sorts of conditions (intact, broken in half, broken in 2-4 pieces, etc., there are pieces buried 70' deep in a frozen lake, pieces are exposed and dangling in ice ledges, parts are buried in caves, etc.).
- Is the Ark nearly 1,000 feet long as some think, or is it closer to 400-500 feet long as the Bible states? It certainly can't be both.
- If the Ark is broken, how many pieces are there?
- Given the size specified in the Bible, could mated pairs of every kind of animal in the world (including your dinosaurs) actually fit into the Ark?
- Did Ed Davis actually see the artifacts (including an 8'x30' petrified wood man-made structure) inside the cave that contained them?
Instead of directly answering the questions, it's more like sticking your fingers in your ears, close your eyes, and sing la-la-la-la-la, in order to ignore it. Did I say anything about not believing the Bible account being wrong? No, I didn't. Instead, you've posted numerous things, most of which clearly disagree with the Biblical account, and yet you seem to think nearly all the claims are correct and match the Biblical account. Your answers go off into some other unrelated direction that has absolutely nothing to do with the questions.
Somehow you've gone off on a tangent and say that the Ark landed on the highest mountain of the mountains of Ararat. So what? That's not an answer to my post. The fact is that you have no more of an idea of what really happened than anyone else does. You just don't want to admit it. It's more fun to follow the whims and tales of anyone and everyone who makes a claim about the Ark, no matter how wild or unrelated those claims are. Instead, it seems like you post any claim as long as it includes the words "Ark" and "Ararat".
So the Bible clearly states that the Ark landed on the highest mountain of the mountains of Ararat? Are you sure about that? Perhaps you should reread what the Biblical account says.
Genesis 8:4 (NIV)
and on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat.
Genesis 8:4 (KJV)
And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.
Where does the Genesis account in the Bible say it was the highest mountain of the mountains of Ararat? It says nothing about whether it was the highest mountain or which mountain. It just says "the mountains of Ararat". Plural word. It's describing an area, a region, not a specific location. Do some homework, my friend, instead of relying on your vivid imagination after hearing various wild claims by others.
WOW, Campbell, that has absolutely nothing to do with what I posted. I'm not talking about what the Bible claims. I'm talking about what people claim.
(I've taken the liberty of slightly editing your excellent post, NB, for "dramatic effect".... with apologies; rifleman)
The point is that everyone including their cats and dogs are making all sorts of wild claims.
-There are claims of it being in all sorts of completely different locations (including different countries), and claims that it's ......
- If the Ark is broken, how many......
- Given the size specified in the Bible, could mated pairs of every kind of animal.......
- Did Ed Davis actually see the......
Instead of directly answering the questions, it's more like sticking your fingers in your ears, close your eyes, and sing la-la-la-la-la, in order to ignore it.
Your answers go off into some other unrelated direction that has absolutely nothing to do with the questions.
The fact is that you have no more of an idea of what really happened than anyone else does.
But give him additional credit, NB: if there's some missing facts, he'll just make some up and trumpet them as confirmed absolutes.
And, as predicted, this is Tom's reliable answer:
"The Bible clearly tells us, that the Ark of Noah, landed on the highest mountain, of the mountains of Ararat.
(Of course, NB proved this to be yet another of Tom's wishful fantasies)
In my own personal life I have discovered, that the God of the Bible sometimes does things that others would think impossible. And Noah's Ark, just happens to be one of those things."
Remember that broken record analogy I provided a posted a few pages ago? Doesn't matter WHAT we point out, Tom just auto-reverts. If chased into a corner, he'll ignore your question, and just regurgitate this same line. Or attribute it all to MAGIC, as here.
So, as Mystic notes; this is truly a silly thread, huh? C34 does succeed in getting our collective goat, and for that, I suppose he can giggle, clap his hands and pat himself on the back. We continue to assume we're dealing with a rational individual, but we also know now that he believes in angelic choruses within badly recorded church music. Just because someone suggested it.
What this has done for me is to sharpen my in-depth knowledge of all the silly arguments for an Ark, for any fool who chooses to take on this topic with me face to face, where they can't run and hide. Where they'll have to agree that this Ark simply could not have happened.
Now we all know that there is no plausible argument from anyone that supports the totality of a literal Ark, and in particular, the end will arrive when or if any credible team gets up there. Otherwise, if it's a Christian "study team", from all past experience, we'll just assume it will be yet another hoax, complete with requests for donations, as Tom's Dial-A-Prayer does.
Nothing like Money Grubbing based on people's irrational imaginations, huh?
Go have a nice hot chocolate, NB, and stop shaking your head like that....
WOW, Campbell, that has absolutely nothing to do with what I posted. I'm not talking about what the Bible claims. I'm talking about what people claim.
The Dial-A-Prayer link YOU provided, and the TVNZ link which DAP provided, both posted about an Ararat anomoly (as seen by satellite) that a boat-like shape is believed by a U.S. group of Ark-searchers believes it to be the Ark. The length of the shape is estimated to be nearly 1,000 feet long. The dimensions as specified by the Bible puts the length of the Ark at only half that size. If the shape was the Ark, and is 1,000 feet long, AND the Ark is broken in two to four pieces as Ed Davis and Abas claim, then the Ark would have to be even longer, perhaps 2,000 feet to perhaps a half mile long.
The point is that everyone including their cats and dogs are making all sorts of wild claims. There are claims of it being in all sorts of completely different locations (including different countries), and claims that it's in all sorts of conditions (intact, broken in half, broken in 2-4 pieces, etc., there are pieces buried 70' deep in a frozen lake, pieces are exposed and dangling in ice ledges, parts are buried in caves, etc.).
- Is the Ark nearly 1,000 feet long as some think, or is it closer to 400-500 feet long as the Bible states? It certainly can't be both.
- If the Ark is broken, how many pieces are there?
- Given the size specified in the Bible, could mated pairs of every kind of animal in the world (including your dinosaurs) actually fit into the Ark?
- Did Ed Davis actually see the artifacts (including an 8'x30' petrified wood man-made structure) inside the cave that contained them?
Instead of directly answering the questions, it's more like sticking your fingers in your ears, close your eyes, and sing la-la-la-la-la, in order to ignore it. Did I say anything about not believing the Bible account being wrong? No, I didn't. Instead, you've posted numerous things, most of which clearly disagree with the Biblical account, and yet you seem to think nearly all the claims are correct and match the Biblical account. Your answers go off into some other unrelated direction that has absolutely nothing to do with the questions.
Somehow you've gone off on a tangent and say that the Ark landed on the highest mountain of the mountains of Ararat. So what? That's not an answer to my post. The fact is that you have no more of an idea of what really happened than anyone else does. You just don't want to admit it. It's more fun to follow the whims and tales of anyone and everyone who makes a claim about the Ark, no matter how wild or unrelated those claims are. Instead, it seems like you post any claim as long as it includes the words "Ark" and "Ararat".
So the Bible clearly states that the Ark landed on the highest mountain of the mountains of Ararat? Are you sure about that? Perhaps you should reread what the Biblical account says.
Genesis 8:4 (NIV)
and on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat.
Genesis 8:4 (KJV)
And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.
Where does the Genesis account in the Bible say it was the highest mountain of the mountains of Ararat? It says nothing about whether it was the highest mountain or which mountain. It just says "the mountains of Ararat". Plural word. It's describing an area, a region, not a specific location. Do some homework, my friend, instead of relying on your vivid imagination after hearing various wild claims by others.
No one really knows how long the Ark was, because no one knows how long a cubit is. And that is the measurement given in the Scriptures. Now the Bible said the vent on top of the ark was one cubit high. And George Hagopian who said he was walking on the top of the Ark in the year 1904, when he was 10 years old. He said, the vent that ran across the top of the Ark was large enought for a small cow to walk through. So one could say if that was accurate, that a cubit could be 3 feet. If that was the case, the Ark might be much bigger then first believed. Russian pilots back around world I, said the Ark was the size of a modern day battleship of their time.
Where does the Bible say it was the highest mountain of the mountains of Ararat? It says nothing about whether it was the highest mountain or which mountain.
Genesis 8:4 and on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat.
Now verse 5 tells us, that about 2 and a half months later (THE TOPS OF THE OTHER MOUNTAINS BECAME VISIBLE).
You see my friend, I did not have to rely on any vivid imagination, or listen to anyone's wild claims. I just had to fully read the Biblical account. And your wrong assumptions were made, because you did not do your homework. LOL
There is only one place on earth where the Ark can be according to the Scriptures, and that would be near the very top of Mt. Ararat. And that is where are best pictures to date, have come from.
Maybe it does, but as a work of fiction, that is exactly what it is, fiction. I really pity those that can't see this when science, and just a good dose of common sense and the must rudimentary thought process so clearly tell us this is simply impossible.
The laws of physics have not changed, the weather has not changed, else no one could have survived.
Lunacy that there is enough water to cause a global flood.
Surface area of the earth 196,940,400 sq/mi
Surface area in acres (1 sq/mi = 640 acres) =126,041,856,000 acres
1 foot of water over 1 acre (1 acre foot) = 325,851 US gallons
Enough water to cover the earth to a depth of 1 foot. 41,070,864,819,456,000 gallons.
Enough water to cover Mt. Ararat (12,782 feet) = 524,967,794,122,286,592,000 gallons
Enough water to cover everything (29,035 Mt. Everest) = 1,192,492,560,032,904,960,000 gallons in addition to the water that is already here.
That is approximately 365% MORE water than exists today on the planet. Where did it all go?
Last edited by Asheville Native; 12-06-2009 at 12:47 PM..
I keep seeing the statement “the bible tells us” over and over. At what point will those who use this term recognize it would be the same as searching for answers on the walls of a service station men’s bathroom. Many of us see your bible as nothing more than myths and lies. If you wish to debate you need something better than the bible to support your views.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
