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.
I don't say that you did.I mention that as an example of how people can go overboard on rather little evidence and are devilish reluctant to let go.
I must say I'm rather skeptical about getting an 'exact' location for the Ark from the Bible. It makes me wonder which came first, the location or the sighting?
The flood and ark of Utnaphistim in The Epic of Gilgamesh came first, so any question concerning "Noah's Ark" in the plagiarized Biblical version of the story is pretty much entirely moot...
Yeah! That really does look like a boat....... Image Display
Campbell! You're one crazy brother!!
Rafius, they have the GPS numbers. And that is one of the worst pictures of the Ark I ever saw. Only on very hot summers can anyone see the Ark. Most of the time it is fully covered in deep ice. And that is what makes it so hard to photograph. And the fact that it's in such a remote location makes it all the harder to get to. And I do know something about looking for shipwrecks. I have spent my free time over the years looking for a wreck here in Lake Michigan, named the Chicora. Only in recent years was I able to locate her. Yet even though I'm the only one who knows where she sank. I am still unable to dive on her, because the Chicora is buried in about 20 feet of sand. I am now going to visit that spot each year in hopes that the wave action well sweep the sand bar clear of the wreck. The Ark of Noah will be found, yet the right conditions must exist before we can see her.
The flood and ark of Utnaphistim in The Epic of Gilgamesh came first, so any question concerning "Noah's Ark" in the plagiarized Biblical version of the story is pretty much entirely moot...
Well, I believe the problem with the Epic of Gilgamesh, is it gives the wrong location for the Ark of Noah. It places the Ark on a mountain 200 miles south of Ararat. Yet, the only place where the eyewitness accounts see the Ark, is near the top of Mt. Ararat. Now Gilgamesh may of gotten the story out first, yet the Bible is the only Book that accurately gives the details of the Arks last location.
And the fact that it's in such a remote location makes it all the harder to get to.
Ummmm! Helicopter perhaps?
Quote:
And I do know something about looking for shipwrecks. I have spent my free time over the years looking for a wreck here in Lake Michigan, named the Chicora. Only in recent years was I able to locate her. Yet even though I'm the only one who knows where she sank. I am still unable to dive on her, because the Chicora is buried in about 20 feet of sand.
How did you manage that if its under 20 feet of sand?
Quote:
The Ark of Noah will be found, yet the right conditions must exist before we can see her.
The account of Ed Davis was confirmed by photo interpretation specialist George Stephen.
Way back in 1943, Davis said he saw the Ark on Mt. Ararat. He said it was broken in two. Now about 40 years later, George Stephen considered satellite images taken of Ararat, and this is his exact words.
"On the mountain (Ararat) is the rectangular shape of two man-made organic objects. One above the other. Looks like maybe 1200 foot difference. Both objects look like they were joined at one time because there's a spectral trail going down from one to the other."
"I can't tell you what it's made of, but it's not metal and it's not rock. It would have to be organic, perhaps wood. It's ancient but I'm not saying it's the Ark because I haven't 'seen it. All I can say is that I'm a hundred percent sure it's a man-made object."
Now you may think Davis is loonie, yet, what Davis said he saw, was confirmed by satellite images. And George Stephen, is military-trained, and a 30 year veteren of photo interpretation. Davis stated he saw a large ship broken in two with seperated sections. He could see it had triple decks, and cages inside. I know such facts may be disturbing to some who have a fixed worldview.
And yet your entire argument is discredited by many others using the same, or better, evidence. You of course will continue to stick your head in the biblical sand, refusing to admit any contrary thought to enter your thoughts.
Well, it should be obvious that weather patterns would of been radically different after a worldwide flood.
Is English not your primary language, or are you simply uneducated? Because all the mistakes you make in spelling and grammar are so very grating that on top of your scientific ignorance, they make you look like you have perhaps a fifth-grade education at best.
How you can persist in your ludicrous fantasies and anti-scientific stance is mind-boggling to me.
The flood and ark of Utnaphistim in The Epic of Gilgamesh came first, so any question concerning "Noah's Ark" in the plagiarized Biblical version of the story is pretty much entirely moot...
Genesis is first, not the epic of Gilgamesh. From Noah came all that inhabit the earth. So, for every culture to have a reference to the global flood is reasonable, which they do.
Genesis was compiled by Moses, not written by him.
I could go out in my backyard and if I looked hard enough I'm sure I could locate some odd bits of rocks that would bear as much resemblance to an ark as the photo that Rafius posted (of course it would just be a little ark). Human beings are always looking for patterns. I think it was on one of the Mars missions when some of the engineers were able to find what resembled their initials on some of rocks in the photographs that were sent to earth. As we've stated many times, the teams of men who have supposedly walked inside of the ark many years ago either forgot to bring their cameras or their photos have been hidden from the public. That's just not a credible source of evidence.
Genesis is first, not the epic of Gilgamesh. From Noah came all that inhabit the earth. So, for every culture to have a reference to the global flood is reasonable, which they do.
Genesis was compiled by Moses, not written by him.
So when was Genesis written?
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.
