It's a rock cliff face.
Posted on 03/09/2006 11:30:41 PM PST by Tim Long
Digital image of 'Ararat Anomaly' has researchers taking closer look
A new, high-resolution digital image of what has become known as the "Ararat Anomaly" is reigniting interest in the hunt for Noah's Ark.
Satellite image of 'Ararat Anomaly,' taken by DigitalGlobe's QuickBird Satellite in 2003 and now made public for the first time (courtesy: DigitalGlobe)
The location of the anomaly on the northwest corner of Mt. Ararat in eastern Turkey has been under investigation from afar by ark hunters for years, but it has remained unexplored, with the government of Turkey not granting any scientific expedition permission to explore on site.
But the detail revealed by the new photo from DigitalGlobe's QuickBird satellite has a man at the helm of the probe excited once again.
"I've got new found optimism ... as far as my continuing push to have the intelligence community declassify some of the more definitive-type imagery," Porcher Taylor, an associate professor in paralegal studies at the University of Richmond, told Space.com.
For more than three decades, Taylor has been a national security analyst, and has also served as a senior associate for five years at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, D.C.
"I'm calling this my satellite archaeology project," Taylor said.
Space.com reports the project has been combining the photographic resources of QuickBird with GeoEye's Ikonos spacecraft, Canada's Radarsat 1, as well as declassified aerial and satellite images snapped by U.S. intelligence agencies.
While it's quite possible the item of interest could simply be a natural ridge of rock, snow and ice, Taylor says there's also a chance it could be something manmade.
"I had no preconceived notions or agendas when I began this in 1993 as to what I was looking for," he said. "I maintain that if it is the remains of something manmade and potentially nautical, then it's potentially something of biblical proportions."
The anomaly remains ensconced in glacial ice at an altitude of 15,300 feet, and Taylor says the photos suggest it's length-to-width ratio is close to 6:1, as indicated in the Book of Genesis.
The U.S. Air Force took the first photographs of the Mt. Ararat site in 1949. The images allegedly revealed what seemed to be a structure covered by ice, but were held for years in a confidential file labeled "Ararat Anomaly."
The new image was actually taken in 2003, but has never been revealed to the public until now.
Arking up the wrong tree?
Meanwhile, there are others who believe Noah's Ark has already been found, and tourists can actually visit it on a mountain next to Ararat.
Some believe this is Noah's Ark, already found on a mountain next to Mt. Ararat (courtesy: wyattmuseum.com)
The late Ron Wyatt, whose Tennessee-based foundation, Wyatt Archaeological Research, purported the ark has already been found at Dogubayazit, Turkey, some 12-15 miles from Ararat, noting Genesis states the ark rested "upon the mountains of Ararat," not mountain.
Is this a hair from a large cat aboard Noah's Ark? (photo: Richard Rives, wyattmuseum.com)
Wyatt's website is filled with on-location photographs and charts promoting its case with physical evidence including radar scans of bulkheads on the alleged vessel, deck timber and iron rivets, large "drogue" stones which are thought to have acted as types of anchors, and even some animal hair inside, possibly from a large cat like a lion or tiger.
A flood of doubt
However, there's been no shortage of critics from both scientific and Christian circles who think the Dogubayazit site is erroneous.
Lorence Collins, a retired geology professor from California State University, Northridge, joined the late David Fasold, a one-time proponent of the Wyatt site, in writing a scientific summary claiming the location is "bogus."
"Evidence from microscopic studies and photo analyses demonstrates that the supposed Ark near Dogubayazit is a completely natural rock formation," said the 1996 paper published in the Journal of Geoscience Education. "It cannot have been Noah's Ark nor even a man-made model. It is understandable why early investigators falsely identified it."
The Answers in Genesis website provides an in-depth report attempting to debunk any validity the Dogubayazit site has, and concludes by stating:
"[A]s Christians we need to always exercise due care when claims are made, no matter who makes them, and any claims must always be subjected to the most rigorous scientific scrutiny. If that had happened here, and particularly if the scientific surveys conducted by highly qualified professionals using sophisticated instruments had been more widely publicized and their results taken note of, then these claims would never have received the widespread credence that they have."
Officials with Wyatt Archaeological Research remain unfazed in the face of such criticism.
"The site ... is actually something that you can look at. Not some made up story that no one is quite able to reach but something that is really there," said president Richard Rives. "It is a 'boat-shaped object' composed of material containing organic carbon, which is what is found in petrified wood. ...
"While there is more research that needs to be done at the site, there is a substantial amount of evidence that would indicate that the Wyatt site is not a natural object. ...
"Today, everyone wants to tell us how to think. We, at Wyatt Archaeological Research, do not do that. We just present the evidence that we have and let each individual make his own decision."
In both the Old and New Testaments, the Bible speaks of Noah and the ark, and Jesus Christ and the apostles Paul and Peter all make reference to Noah's flood as an actual historical event.
'Noah's Ark' by Pennsylvania artist Edward Hicks, 1846
According to Genesis, Noah was a righteous man who was instructed by God to construct a large vessel to hold his family and many species of animals, as a massive deluge was coming to purify the world which had become corrupt.
Genesis 6:5 states: "And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."
Noah was told by God to take aboard seven pairs of each of the "clean" animals – that is to say, those permissible to eat – and two each of the "unclean" variety. (Gen. 7:2)
Though the Bible says it rained for 40 days and 40 nights, it also mentions "the waters prevailed upon the earth a hundred and fifty days."
The ark then "rested" upon the mountains of Ararat, but it was still months before Noah and his family – his wife, his three sons and the sons' wives – were able to leave the ark and begin replenishing the world.
It doesn't matter to me whether Noah's Ark is found or not. However, I am left wondering why photos of Mt.Ararat have been classified for so many years. Can anyone say, "information suppression"? Really, what is on Mt.Ararat that would be considered "classified"? The only answer that comes to my mind is that there are scientists and archeologists that do not want Noah's Ark found. I mean, how far would that set them and their theories back? We would see the world's best back pedalers in action.
Scientists who wish to suppress the truth to protect their theories don't deserve the title.
Iron? Meaning it was built during the Iron Age around 1300 BC.
Because the paranoid government drones are afraid of inciting the paranoid tinfoil hat wearing Area 51 crowd...
One begets the other...
The most likely answer to come to my mind is that the level of detail in the photograph itself was what was classified- our technical ability.
It's a rock cliff face.
When we continually hear that a license plate can be spotted from a satellite how much more detailed can anything get?
That looks like Noah's submarine that was mentioned in one of the Dead Sea scrolls.
It's a rock cliff face.
It doesn't matter to me whether Noah's Ark is found or not. However, I am left wondering why photos of Mt.Ararat have been classified for so many years. Can anyone say, "information suppression"? Really, what is on Mt.Ararat that would be considered "classified"?
Can't someone just fly a helicopter up there and see what the hell the deal is?
The largest climatic disaster in history wasn't caused by global warming, it was caused by global wickedness. When sin is removed from man's nature, so will every problem and disaster we currently deal with.
But they're not allowed to say.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2/4377news9-14-2000.asp
"The Bible says that Noah’s Flood was global, but the Black Sea flood was only local. The Bible says the Flood covered the highest mountains, but the Black Sea flood only rose by a few hundred feet. It didn’t even cover the mountains in the local area. The Bible says that Noah built an Ark, but the Black Sea flood needed no such vessel. The water came up so slowly that the residents would have walked to higher land. The Bible says that everyone outside the Ark drowned, but the Black Sea flood simply displaced the residents. The Bible says that only the animals and birds on the Ark survived, but not so with the local Black Sea flood. The Bible says there was forty days of rain, but the Black Sea flood had no rain. The Bible says that the Flood ended when the waters went down and land was dry. But the waters of the Black Sea flood have not gone down yet. The list could go on. There is absolutely no resemblance whatever between the Black Sea flood and the biblical Flood of Noah."
The IRON AGE has nothing to do with the discovery of Iron, it is called the IRON AGE because of the relationship of what countries are world powers compared to the prophecies in Daniel and what Nebudchannezer's dream was:
Gold = Babylon
Silver = medio-Persia
Bronze = Greece
Iron = Rome
Impossible, that's not an ark! Where would the animals fit? There's just enough room for 7 castaways...
Actually, they were afraid of revealing the 14 different Noah's Arks that have been found, for fear it would reveal the existence of the antediluvian mass-cloning program and the veritable naval fleet of arks which are scattered all over the place:
CH500: The ArkThe only answer that comes to my mind is that there are scientists and archeologists that do not want Noah's Ark found.And: Sun Pictures and the Noah's Ark Hoax
- CH500. Noah's ark has been found.
- CH501. We can expect to find Noah's ark on Mount Ararat.
- CH502.1. Noah's ark may have been photographed on Ararat in 1949.
- CH502.2. ERTS satellite photographed Noah's ark in 1973.
- CH503. Noah's ark has been found near Dogubayazit, Turkey.
- CH504.1. James Bryce found a 4-foot timber high on Ararat.
- CH504.2. Navarra retrieved hand-hewn wood from high on Ararat.
- CH504.3. Hardwicke Knight found soft wood timbers on Ararat.
- CH505.1. Yearam guided three vile scientists to Noah's ark in 1916.
- CH505.2. An 1883 Turkish expedition found Noah's ark.
- CH505.3. Prince Nouri of Baghdad found the ark in 1887.
- CH505.4. Hagopian visited the ark with his uncle around 1908.
- CH505.5. Russian aviator Roskovitsky photographed the ark.
- CH505.6. Resit, a Kurdish farmer, found the ark in 1948.
- CH505.7. Local Kurds led Ed Davis to the ark in 1943.
- CH505.8. Ed Behling was led to the ark in 1973.
LOL! If that's the "only" possible reason that comes to your mind as to why aerial photographs, especially from intelligence agencies, might have been classified, then you're suffering from a severe lack of critical thinking. Hint: What about the dozen or more reasons that aerial photographs of areas *other* than Ararat are routinely classified?
I mean, how far would that set them and their theories back?
Ah yes, the nefarious "them"... And their "theories" Which Must Not Be Named...
Looks like it's time to buy more Alcoa stock...
Actually, neither "they" nor "their theories" would be "set back", because the theories are based on the totality of the evidence and research, and none of that would change whether or not someone found a boat. The evidence would still indicate what it indicates, and the research results would still be what they are. Nuclear isotopes would continue to decay at the same rate, population genetics would still behave the same way, etc.
Nah, you can't sell books and collect "expedition money" for close-up photos of a rock outcropping. It has to be an ongoing "unsolved mystery" to keep the money flowing in, so it'd be foolhardy to go resolve it the quick and easy way.
CH505.1. Yearam guided three vile scientists to Noah's ark in 1916.1916 was the yeat that the elderly Armenian allegely spun the tale to Rev Harold Williams. The event supposedly happened in the mid-1850s
"I showed the ark to three atheists, who were then called scientists" 
"Actually, neither "they" nor "their theories" would be "set back", because the theories are based on the totality of the evidence and research, and none of that would change whether or not someone found a boat"
And their "totality of the evidence and research" Which Must Not Be Named. Science has become a religion with people who defend their "theories" as profound facts and death to anyone who dares not to believe. All of your theories are based on a set of assumptions, some of which are probably correct, some of which are probably incorrect. For you to say that a discovery such as this would have no impact is proof you lack an open mind. Who knows what will be discovered tomorrow, maybe its fusion in a bottle with speakers attached, maybe its liquid water on one of Saturns moons.
It would certainly be a kick in the head for those who explain fish fossils, etc., far inland in many places, to the earths undulation.
The flood is no more far fetched than the relativity of time, worm holes, the string theory, dark matter, anti matter, etc.
Personally, with my limited knowledge, if the earth's crust is floating on a molten center, continental drift, which seems obvious by just looking at a globe, and undulation seem probable. The flood doesn't. Yet, much about the Bible doesn't seem plausible and I believe it, give or take a few translation inconsistencies.
Looks more like a battleship! Are we missing any...
Evesdropping devices aimed at the Soviets?
Granted Iron has existed long before the Babalonians and definitely as far back as when "Lucy" (Not Desi's Lucy) first walked upright, mainly in meteorites. thought the found percentages is low (~18 %).
Truly, the Iron age is the era when man broke the code to manufacture iron from the raw materials of the Earth. You can't tell me that if the technology existed thousands of years before that no one would have used it for purposes other than creating rivits.
After all, tools, weapons, farm implements, nails, all kinds of applications, everything you can imagine and use today could have been done centuries prior.
Wyatt Archaeological Research has been known to promote some questionable information. I wouldn't believe what they have to say. I reinforce what Answers in Genesis says - caution. As much as I would like to see that ark, I don't believe that lying and making crazy claims aids Christianity. At one time, Wyatt Archaeological Research claimed they had a sample fo Christs' blood. That's crazy.
"The only answer that comes to my mind is that there are scientists and archeologists that do not want Noah's Ark found. "
I agree with you.
The muslims have Noah's ark resting ELSWHERE not on Mount Ararat. This would be a major blow to their wrong beliefs. The surroundiong areas are MUSLIM. I doubt that they would like to be WRONG on where they believe the Ark rests and Christianity and the Jews be RIGHT.
"Finding Noah's ark couldn't possibly do the theory of evolution any good."
No it wouldn't but they conjure up some story about that too. Lying is not new to them. Neither are their hoaxes.
It's a politically charged area. Turkey, Syria and Russia don't want people there.
Only if you can explain how Noah and his family kept two of every wild animal and 7 of every domesticated animal on a boat 450 feet long by 75 feet wide for 8 months.
300 by 50 by 30 cubits, apparently.
I met a guy some years ago, a believer who claimed to have had a good look at the ark from an airplane. He was a pilot, the husband of one of my children's elementary school teachers.
You clearly have never seen an episode of Dr. Who. It's the same technology. Isn't it obvious?
Bump for later read
It doesn't matter to me whether Noah's Ark is found or not. However, I am left wondering why photos of Mt.Ararat have been classified for so many years. Can anyone say, "information suppression"? Really, what is on Mt.Ararat that would be considered "classified"?
Just guessing: Mt Ararat is in Turkey. Spying on an ally may prove embarrassing. There may be military bases, or whatever. Just guessing why things are suppressed in a satellite picture
Plus the fact the resolution capability of the satellite taking the pictures is classified. They could be taking a picture of Kansas and it would be classified.
Yep, just like the cast iron skillet I fried some pork chops in last night.
In archaeology, the Iron Age is the stage in the development of any people where the use of iron implements as tools and weapons is prominent. The adoption of this new material coincided with other changes in past societies often including differing agricultural practices, religious beliefs and artistic styles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Age
bump
Now that is a situation that could be probable.
from yesterday's thread
Yeah, I know how hard it is for some scientists to adjust their thinking. They certainly don't have a problem adding or subtracting a million years to their estimates but to actually face evidence and deny it is certainly their modus operandi.
My guess is that it's close to the old Soviet border. I wouldn't be a bit surprised to find some serious electronics in the area.
Well, he obviously wouldn't need to bring aquatic animals, and if he had taken young representatives there would have been plenty of room. AiG says that insects could have survived on floating vegetation mats, but I think that's a little far-fetched.
Where AiG goes wrong however, is claiming that speciation can occur and that "kinds" could have been very broad categories of animals. This likely comes from the failure to realize that the species classification denotes that they can only produce viable offspring with fellow species members. For instance, I have seen a picture from their museum of a model of a giraffe-okapi blend. This would be impossible, as they are different species. AiG compares this to the types of dogs, but he seems to fail to realize that the breeds are all the same species.
I think the same people who see the ark on Ararat are prone to see Jesus on a grilled cheese sandwich.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.