Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is the Wood Recently Found on Mt. Ararat from the Ark?
Answers in Genesis ^ | Nov. 9, 2011 | Andrew A. Snelling

Posted on 11/16/2011 7:49:05 AM PST by fishtank

From the conclusion:

"Conclusion

If the wooden remains of the Ark were to be found on Mt. Ararat, then samples of that wood would be expected to yield C-14 dates of between 20,000 years and 50,000 years, consistent with the C-14 dates of pre-Flood wood found fossilized in the geologic record of the Flood. Even though the true age of such fossilized pre-Flood wood should be only 4,500 years or so old, around the date for the biblical Flood, these grossly inflated C-14 dates obtained in conventional radiocarbon dating laboratories are due to those laboratories ignoring the very much less C-14 in the pre-Flood world compared to today’s world. But in strong contrast, the wood samples that have been claimed by a Chinese-Turkish team to have supposedly come from their discovery of the wooden remains of the Ark on Ararat have yielded C-14 dates from analyses in conventional radiocarbon laboratories ranging from recent (modern) to 6,891±4,647 years. These results are grossly short of what the C-14 dates should be for pre-Flood wood. Therefore, if we logically follow the soundest scientific inference, it must be concluded that these wood samples cannot have come from the pre-Flood wood used to build the Ark. Given the present C-14 evidence, despite the tantalizing wooden remains the Chinese-Turkish team claims to have discovered on Mt. Ararat, such artifacts CANNOT have come from the Ark. So whatever they have found, they are NOT the remains of the Ark."

(Excerpt) Read more at answersingenesis.org ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: ararat; archaeology; ark; belongsinreligion; creation; flood; noah; noahsark; religion; turkey
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-87 next last
Full article at link.
1 posted on 11/16/2011 7:49:06 AM PST by fishtank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: fishtank

Figure 1. One of the photos released by the discovery team of the inside of the wooden structure claimed to be part of the remains of the Ark which they found on Mt. Ararat.

2 posted on 11/16/2011 7:52:40 AM PST by fishtank (The denial of original sin is the root of liberalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

Asked about this study Sheila Jackson Lee said “Will they putting any pieces of the Arkansas of the Gubmint on a C-14 and fly it back to the U.S.?


3 posted on 11/16/2011 7:53:48 AM PST by Terry Mross (I'll only vote for a second party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

That, or Genesis may simply be a summary of real history and wasn’t meant to be taken literal.

Just throwing that out as a possibility.


4 posted on 11/16/2011 7:54:30 AM PST by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fishtank
I saw a presentation on that a while back - seemed pretty convincing.
Not that it really matters anyway - "we walk be faith and not by sight".
5 posted on 11/16/2011 7:54:43 AM PST by Psalm 73 ("Gentlemen, you can't fight in here - this is the War Room".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

yes


6 posted on 11/16/2011 7:55:49 AM PST by stuartcr ("Everything happens as God wants it to...otherwise, things would be different.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

Figure 2. The samples of white pellets, rope and wood on display at the press conference in Hong Kong on April 25, 2010, which the discovery team claimed came from the wooden remains on Mt. Ararat purported to be the Ark. (i.e., they're FAKES - fishtank's comment).

7 posted on 11/16/2011 7:56:23 AM PST by fishtank (The denial of original sin is the root of liberalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fishtank
So.... the "grossly inflated" dates are due to scientific ignorance of C-14 levels, and the current tests range from "recent" to 6,891±4,647 years (not sure where "recent" leaves off, compared to 6891-4647 years ago), but we're "logically follow the soundest scientific inference" to say that these are NOT remains of the Ark.

Got it.

8 posted on 11/16/2011 7:58:25 AM PST by Izzy Dunne (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

That’s a lot of wood to carry up that mountain...


9 posted on 11/16/2011 8:00:35 AM PST by GourmetDan (Eccl 10:2 - The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30
"That, or Genesis may simply be a summary of real history and wasn’t meant to be taken literal. Just throwing that out as a possibility."

If it can't be taken literally then it's not a summary of REAL history. I would note that Jesus took Genesis literally.

10 posted on 11/16/2011 8:02:30 AM PST by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Terry Mross
"Noahs' ark wood is on Mars?"


11 posted on 11/16/2011 8:04:18 AM PST by evets (beer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: evets

She needs to get out of that limo and walk the three blocks to work.


12 posted on 11/16/2011 8:06:04 AM PST by morphing libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

then samples of that wood would be expected to yield C-14 dates of between 20,000 years and 50,000 years, consistent with the C-14 dates of pre-Flood wood found fossilized in the geologic record of the Flood

nice straw man LOL

6,891±4,647 years ago seems more in line with when I would of expected the arc to have existed.


13 posted on 11/16/2011 8:08:06 AM PST by TexasFreeper2009 (Cain 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

I think this story has already been debunked as a hoax, hasn’t it?


14 posted on 11/16/2011 8:08:47 AM PST by ducttape45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

Got Wood?


15 posted on 11/16/2011 8:09:58 AM PST by null and void (MSGT Dean Hopkins USMC (ret) WWII-Korea-Vietnam 11/9/1925-10/22/2011 My hero, my Dad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Izzy Dunne

Sounds like a statement crafted by a government committee. But with a seemingly continuous flow of these expeditions bringing back wood fragments, it should make one wonder how that wood got up there — in the neighborhood of 15,000 ft elevations, above the tree line and above the snow line. Just sayin’.


16 posted on 11/16/2011 8:10:02 AM PST by alancarp (Liberals are all for shared pain... until they're included in the pain group.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

Thanks for this post! I have always been fascinated by “ark sightings”.


17 posted on 11/16/2011 8:10:33 AM PST by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

I have to wonder if these answers in genesis guys are really based in KY...I mean, who schedules or participates on a conference call during modern gun deer season? This is KY after all. Get your priorities right!


18 posted on 11/16/2011 8:16:28 AM PST by WKUHilltopper (And yet...we continue to tolerate this crap...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

The pellets are - what - Pre-Purina rabbit chow?


19 posted on 11/16/2011 8:17:55 AM PST by jagusafr ("We hold these truths to be self-evident...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: null and void
Got Wood?

Got wood? Heck, I Woke Up With It!

20 posted on 11/16/2011 8:18:06 AM PST by JaguarXKE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

> and wasn’t meant to be taken literal.

Blessed are the Cheesemakers?

It’s not meant to be taken literally. Obviously it refers to any makers of dairy products.

-Life of Brian


21 posted on 11/16/2011 8:18:29 AM PST by XEHRpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

Maybe Noah borrowed some wood from an old friend...


22 posted on 11/16/2011 8:18:54 AM PST by broken_arrow1 (I regret that I have but one life to give for my country - Nathan Hale "Patriot")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

“That, or Genesis may simply be a summary of real history and wasn’t meant to be taken literal.”

Jesus took it literally.


23 posted on 11/16/2011 8:20:02 AM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus

Should parts of the Ark be discovered and verified, there are those both in this country and oversea who would be extremely hostile to such revelations, for the Bible would be proven to be history.


24 posted on 11/16/2011 8:25:42 AM PST by JayVee (Joseph)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus

Jesus affirmed the truth in Genesis, I know.

Can you show me that he affirmed the exact dating of Genesis, that exactly, how ever many years prior to His existence on earth, Noah sailed in the Ark?


25 posted on 11/16/2011 8:27:09 AM PST by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: alancarp

How long ago did the mountain become a mountain? On site realities are smeared out to fit global assumptions of mountian building. The top of that mountain may have not been above a tree line when the wood was harvested and something crafted from it. The structure would be more plausible as a fortress for osme as yet unknown group. And hauling wood up a mountain is no more difficult (probably less technologically difficult) than transporting 200 ton blocks to Giza.


26 posted on 11/16/2011 8:27:32 AM PST by MHGinTN (Some, believing they can't be deceived, it's nigh impossible to convince them when they're deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

The only thing cooler than the Shroud of Turin is Noah’s Ark.


27 posted on 11/16/2011 8:34:32 AM PST by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

Those look like relatively small blocks of wood to me.

As I understand it, the original Ark had a Seraphim Big Block (name later changed to Chevy) and only later models had small blocks.

So this can’t be the original ark.


28 posted on 11/16/2011 8:35:11 AM PST by fruser1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

Just how do they come up with the Earth being only 6,000 years anyway? I mean, we have evidence of civilizations 40-60,000 years ago.


29 posted on 11/16/2011 8:38:36 AM PST by Thorliveshere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thorliveshere

Either we are misreading the Biblical story or that we are misreading the historical evidence.

I personally don’t think that it’s an attack on Scripture to affirm the Genesis events, but not necessarily the assumed dates of those events.


30 posted on 11/16/2011 8:44:25 AM PST by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

That, or Genesis may simply be a summary of real history and wasn’t meant to be taken literal.
_______________________________
Uh Oh, Here we go...


31 posted on 11/16/2011 8:47:09 AM PST by lp boonie (Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30
I personally don’t think that it’s an attack on Scripture to affirm the Genesis events, but not necessarily the assumed dates of those events.

I believe everything that happened in Genesis happened, I just think the time frame is not quite right. I had read that some pastor had figured out the 6,000 year time frame, but then we get pastors like Camping. If he's wrong, wouldn't the guy "figuring" out how much time passed through Genesis be wrong, too?
32 posted on 11/16/2011 8:47:21 AM PST by Thorliveshere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Thorliveshere

Many Biblical scholars think that, for example, Adam may have begetted Seth, but those names are simply the prominent names of that genetic pathway.

There could be people in between Adam and Seth, but there is little value in listing the ten people between Adam and Seth, because they contributed nothing to the history of man.


33 posted on 11/16/2011 8:50:49 AM PST by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

Can you show us where the Bible is in error?

Things are not as they appear to be in this world
esp. as we approach the last days.

See my links page for some young earth science stuff.


34 posted on 11/16/2011 8:57:18 AM PST by BrandtMichaels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Thorliveshere

The idea of a 6,000 year-old planet is a construct of men. God has nothing to do with the errors of man, which are profligate and ongoing.


35 posted on 11/16/2011 8:58:49 AM PST by SaxxonWoods (.....The days are long but the years are short.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30
There could be people in between Adam and Seth, but there is little value in listing the ten people between Adam and Seth, because they contributed nothing to the history of man.

Right, I've wondered that. I mean, Jesus comes from the line of Jesse, but not every single generation is listed to get to him, only the most prominent.
36 posted on 11/16/2011 9:00:32 AM PST by Thorliveshere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: BrandtMichaels

I’m not saying the Bible is in error, not one word.

However, our understanding of the Bible may not be completely correct, is all.


37 posted on 11/16/2011 9:01:08 AM PST by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Thorliveshere; Jonty30

Remember Jesus did say not one jot or tittle would be removed from the Holy Words...


38 posted on 11/16/2011 9:01:40 AM PST by BrandtMichaels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: JaguarXKE

Too afraid to click on it...


39 posted on 11/16/2011 9:03:10 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

Hebrew and Greek scholars do attest that the current biblical translations are over 99.9% accurate. Very little has been lost in translation and nowadays even more light is being shed on the exact meanings.


40 posted on 11/16/2011 9:03:37 AM PST by BrandtMichaels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

nice on-the-money toss


41 posted on 11/16/2011 9:10:40 AM PST by tweakDU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: alancarp
it should make one wonder how that wood got up there

Yeah -- I mean it's not like ancient people ever made stuff out of wood and carried some of it around with them....

42 posted on 11/16/2011 9:11:36 AM PST by Retro Llama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: BrandtMichaels
Remember Jesus did say not one jot or tittle would be removed from the Holy Words...

Yes, but nowhere does it say in Genesis say XXX amount of years passed. It's all guess work of a nobody preacher. It does not invalidate the events of the Bible one bit to surmise that more years passed than what mr. nobody preacher says. We also get little things like Cain going to live with others after his ostracisation. Where did those people come from? Time had to go by to populate that region, right? Especially when Cain and Abel are first sons.
43 posted on 11/16/2011 9:16:00 AM PST by Thorliveshere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: JayVee

Lot of people don’t believe david ever existed because it isn’t written everywhere in archeological finds.


44 posted on 11/16/2011 9:16:18 AM PST by mel (There are only 2 races decent and undecent people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: null and void

45 posted on 11/16/2011 9:18:54 AM PST by dfwgator (I stand with Herman Cain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Thorliveshere

It is NOT guesswork - simply adding the ages of the patriarchs and their first born males. Jesus Christ lineage is documented twice both from Joseph and from Mary.

How do you like them apples?


46 posted on 11/16/2011 9:20:45 AM PST by BrandtMichaels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama; MHGinTN

Obviously we’d be talking about a bunch of it here... way more than anybody would reasonably carry, and this is hardly a militarily strategic spot, so there’s no reason to go that high up for any sustainable purpose.

Suffice it to say: if somebody finds — and reasonably documents — an ‘ark-like’ quantity of wood not native to the area up there, then it becomes a news story.


47 posted on 11/16/2011 9:21:35 AM PST by alancarp (Liberals are all for shared pain... until they're included in the pain group.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Thorliveshere

In Adam’s case I believe it was from Seth not Cain nor Able.


48 posted on 11/16/2011 9:23:53 AM PST by BrandtMichaels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: BrandtMichaels

http://www.biblestudy.org/maps/large-chart-life-span-patriarchs-from-adam-to-noah.html


49 posted on 11/16/2011 9:26:34 AM PST by BrandtMichaels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: fishtank
these grossly inflated C-14 dates obtained in conventional radiocarbon dating laboratories are due to those laboratories ignoring the very much less C-14 in the pre-Flood world compared to today’s world.

I'm mildly curious to know the basis for this claim. I don't recall seeing anything about 14C in the Bible.

50 posted on 11/16/2011 9:29:35 AM PST by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-87 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson