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

Skip to comments.

Noah's Ark Found? Turkey Expedition Planned For Summer
National Geographic News ^ | 4-27-2004 | Hillary Mayall

Posted on 04/28/2004 1:17:42 PM PDT by blam

Noah's Ark Found? Turkey Expedition Planned for Summer

Hillary Mayell
for National Geographic News
April 27, 2004

Satellite pictures taken last summer of Mount Ararat in Turkey may reveal the final resting place of Noah's ark, according to Daniel McGivern, the businessman and Christian activist behind a planned summer 2004 expedition to investigate the site. "We're telling people we're 98 percent sure," said McGivern, a member of the Hawaii Christian Coalition. "In one image we saw the beams, saw the wood. I'm convinced that the excavation of the object and the results of tests run on any collected samples will prove that it is Noah's ark. "

This satellite image of Mount Ararat in Turkey shows what looks like a large object emerging from melting snow. An expedition is planned to visit the site to see if it is Noah's Ark.

Image Courtesy Shamrock/DigitalGlobe

McGivern wrote a list in his Bible more than 20 years ago of ten great projects. Finding Noah's ark was at the top of his list.

McGivern began his quest in earnest in 1995, when the publication of a book on the topic moved him to arrange for satellite images to be taken of Mount Ararat.

Attempts to take satellite images in previous years had been foiled by clouds, unavailability of imaging equipment, and lack of image resolution. But the attempts had helped pinpoint the location. In the summer of 2003, everything came together.

"Last year was the hottest summer in Europe since 1500; more than 21,000 people died of the heat wave," McGivern said. "The summer melt was far more extensive than it has been in years."

DigitalGlobe, a commercial satellite-imagery company, confirmed that they took the images that McGivern is using.

An international team of archaeologists, forensic scientists, geologists, glaciologists, and others is being recruited to investigate the site sometime between July 15 and August 15.

Ahmet Arslan, a professor in Turkey who has climbed the mountain 50 times in 40 years, will lead the expedition. Arslan reported an eyewitness sighting of the ark and took a photograph in 1989 from about 220 yards (200 meters) away. However, he couldn't get any closer, and the picture is not definitive.

"We hope to assemble what we're calling the Dream Team," Arslan said. "The slopes are very, very harsh and dangerous on the northern face—it is extremely challenging, mentally and physically."

Noah's Ark

The story of Noah's ark is told in the Book of Genesis. It says God saw how corrupt the Earth had become and decided to "bring floodwaters on the Earth to destroy all life under the heavens." God is said to have told Noah, an honorable man, to build an ark 450 feet (137 meters) long, 75 feet (23 meters) wide, and 45 feet (14 meters) high, and fill it with two of every species on the Earth. It reportedly rained for 40 days and 40 nights. After about seven months, the waters receded, and the ark came to rest, according to the Bible.

Three major world religions—Christianity, Judaism, and Islam—believe in Noah and his ark. Reports of ark sightings have been numerous. Witnesses often describe an old wooden structure sticking out of the snow and ice near the summit of Mount Ararat.

Despite the numerous sightings and rumors—of pictures taken by the CIA and locked in vaults, of lost photographs taken by a Russian expedition at the behest of Tsar Nicholas Alexander in 1918—no scientific evidence of the ark has emerged.

"On the one hand, I'm hopeful. On the other hand, I'm very skeptical" of the validity of the satellite images, said Rex Geissler, president of ArcImaging (Archaeological Imaging Research Consortium). "There is no publicly available picture that readily shows a man-made object that has any clarity whatsoever … Some of the photos are outright misrepresentations, non-scientific, and do not prove anything.

"We think that with the hundreds of explorers who have visited the region, if the ark was jutting out of the ice, it would be obvious."

ArcImaging was the first organization to receive permission from the Turkish government to survey the mountain since 1981. The archaeological research organization conducted a preliminary investigation of the icecap using ground-penetrating radar in 2001.

The Search Continues

The Bible states that Noah landed in the region of the ancient kingdom Urartu. Mount Ararat (its name probably a corrupted version of Urartu) has been the focus of those seeking the ark because it—at 17,000 feet (5,165 meters)—is the highest point in the area.

A volcanic mountain, Ararat is covered by an icecap from 14,000 feet (4,300 meters) to 17,000 feet (5,200 meters). The icecap is about 17 square miles (44 square kilometers) in size and is as deep as 300 feet (90 meters).

Known to locals as Agri Dagi—Turkish for "mountain of pain"— Ararat is not easy to access. Located in eastern Turkey—close to the borders of Armenia and Iran, and only 150 miles (240 kilometers) from Iraq—the region is politically volatile and often dangerous. Much of the region is part of a military zone, and getting permission to explore it is extremely difficult.

The ArcImaging team hopes to visit the region to continue their mapping of the icecap this summer.

McGivern is optimistic his group will also be on the face of the mountain this summer. He and Arslan met last week with the Turkish ambassador to the U.S. Arslan, who at one time worked in the Turkish prime minister's office, plans to meet with the prime minister next week.

"The ark is broken into a minimum of three pieces, up to six, from a huge earthquake that occurred in 1840. But it's been miraculously preserved. The satellite imagery shows vertical beams, and one horizontal beam," McGivern said.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: ark; expedition; godsgravesglyphs; noahs; noahsark; summer; turkey
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-91 next last

1 posted on 04/28/2004 1:17:42 PM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: farmfriend
Wishful thinking.
2 posted on 04/28/2004 1:18:20 PM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
Again!
3 posted on 04/28/2004 1:19:08 PM PDT by Patrick1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Patrick1
Saw this exact documentary two yrs ago. Geraldo should do this expedition.
4 posted on 04/28/2004 1:22:44 PM PDT by mlbford2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: blam
I think this guy used to sell DVD Rewinders on Ebay.


5 posted on 04/28/2004 1:25:03 PM PDT by Taquito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Taquito
Well said - some good people of faith must have been bilked a lot of money to finance this joyride. Awful.
6 posted on 04/28/2004 1:26:18 PM PDT by HitmanLV (I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: blam; *Gods, Graves, Glyphs; A.J.Armitage; abner; adam_az; AdmSmith; Alas Babylon!; ...
Gods, Graves, Glyphs
List for articles regarding early civilizations , life of all forms, - dinosaurs - etc.
Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this ping list.
7 posted on 04/28/2004 1:26:28 PM PDT by farmfriend ( In Essentials, Unity...In Non-Essentials, Liberty...In All Things, Charity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
Arslan reported an eyewitness sighting of the ark and took a photograph in 1989 from about 220 yards (200 meters) away. However, he couldn't get any closer, and the picture is not definitive.

If I thought I was a measly 200 yards away from Noas Ark, I sure as hell would find a way to get there.
8 posted on 04/28/2004 1:27:29 PM PDT by Husker24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anoreth
Noah's ark
9 posted on 04/28/2004 1:33:23 PM PDT by Tax-chick (I was swimming with dolphins whispering imaginary numbers in the fourth dimension.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #10 Removed by Moderator

To: blam
"I'm convinced that the excavation of the object and the results of tests run on any collected samples will prove that it is Noah's ark. "


Any age-of-the-ark "tests" would have to be of the radio-carbon variety. Therefore, if the results of these particular tests are accepted as fact and as proof of the existence of the Ark, wouldn't the same fundamentalist-type people have to accept as fact the results of other aging tests that prove the age of the Earth to be 4.5 billion years, +/- factors notwithstanding? Can't have it both ways!

11 posted on 04/28/2004 1:35:11 PM PDT by Blzbba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Husker24
If I thought I was a measly 200 yards away from Noas Ark, I sure as hell would find a way to get there.

Not to defend the story, but how much mountaineering have you done? There are a lot of places to which one rightly wouldn't hazard a trip unless one had climbing gear and a partner, or more.

12 posted on 04/28/2004 1:36:18 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (There are people in power who are truly gutless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: farmfriend; Ff--150; 4ConservativeJustices; stainlessbanner
Saw a special the other night on His. Intl. or History Channel. Looked like it was done back in 2000 or so. I'd like to see what they find. Doesn't change the fact the Flood happened but it would be interesting to find Noah's Ark

Noah's Ark bump

13 posted on 04/28/2004 1:38:13 PM PDT by billbears (Deo Vindice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba
Finding a wooden toothpick up there would be proof enough for the supernaturalists.
They wouldn't need dating to know by faith.
14 posted on 04/28/2004 1:42:20 PM PDT by ASA Vet (It will take a few more major hits here at home before we decide on war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba
Can't have it both ways!

Of course they can, because faith trumps proof. Y'see, God created the world OLD, so any date you get before the Bible indicates creation occured is due to carbon-14 randomization.
15 posted on 04/28/2004 1:43:14 PM PDT by cryptical
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: mlbford2
Try reading the article. The documentary you saw two years ago didn't mention the summer of 2003, did it?
16 posted on 04/28/2004 1:47:11 PM PDT by Styria
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba
Radio-carbon isn't used to try to determine the Earth's age.
17 posted on 04/28/2004 1:48:29 PM PDT by Styria
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Styria
No, but they went to Mnt Ararat in Turkey to look for the Ark and found nothing. Same ariel images and the whole bit.
18 posted on 04/28/2004 1:50:46 PM PDT by mlbford2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: blam
will prove that it is Noah's ark

Arkeologists are easily encouraged. I have an Indiana Jones hat, can I come, too?

19 posted on 04/28/2004 1:52:49 PM PDT by RightWhale (Destroy the dark; restore the light)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba
Carbon dating was developed to date dinosaur bones. A good job of carbon dating can get to within anywhere from 1,000-7,000 years of it's actual age. Now, with dinosaurs, which were around for a bit more than 100,000,000 years, getting that close is no problem. But with humanity, 7,000 years can be the difference between stone tools and multi-speed blenders. So either way, the tests would be inconclusive.
20 posted on 04/28/2004 1:53:58 PM PDT by SuperVillain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: blam
...Agri Dagi—Turkish for "mountain of pain"— ...

Which is located in the Hanna-Barbera province, of course, next to Ahgee-Doggie and Doggie-Daddy...

21 posted on 04/28/2004 1:57:27 PM PDT by muleskinner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
Ok, so how exactly does a wooden structure in a nominally exposed position survive thousands of years?

Further, seeing as the world is still much colder then it used to be, wouldn't the ark then also have been easily visible for the thousands of years before the mini ice age?

Finally, if this particular area is so dangerous for modern climbers, wouldn't it have been still exceptionally all the way back to a landing on it by a ship? Both in regards to avoiding slightly under water rocks and also unloading a bunch of animals?
22 posted on 04/28/2004 1:59:06 PM PDT by swilhelm73
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
Aha! Now we learn the real reason the Indiana Jones IV Movie was put on hold...waiting for cheap stock footage from the expedition. Veddy innnteresting.
23 posted on 04/28/2004 2:03:07 PM PDT by Use It Or Lose It (JohnFKerry: A Bad Bottle of French Whine topped with a $1,000 haircut)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SuperVillain
If what you say is true, then how can the determine the age of the Shroud of Turin?
24 posted on 04/28/2004 2:04:34 PM PDT by raybbr (My 1.4 cents - It used to be 2 cents, but after taxes - you get the idea.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: blam
Whats a Cubic?
25 posted on 04/28/2004 2:05:35 PM PDT by bikerman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cryptical
"because faith trumps proof."

Only when credibility isn't an issue.
26 posted on 04/28/2004 2:06:02 PM PDT by Blzbba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SuperVillain
Carbon dating was developed to date dinosaur bones.

Carbon dating only goes back about 50K years, IIRC. It's fairly accurate within that timeframe, too.

27 posted on 04/28/2004 2:07:07 PM PDT by Modernman (Work is the curse of the drinking classes. -Oscar Wilde)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Styria
"Radio-carbon isn't used to try to determine the Earth's age."


The ages of Earth and Moon rocks and of meteorites are measured by the decay of long-lived radioactive isotopes of elements that occur naturally in rocks and minerals and that decay with half lives of 700 million to more than 100 billion years to stable isotopes of other elements. These dating techniques, which are firmly grounded in physics and are known collectively as radiometric dating, are used to measure the last time that the rock being dated was either melted or disturbed sufficiently to rehomogenize its radioactive elements.

Ancient rocks exceeding 3.5 billion years in age are found on all of Earth's continents. The oldest rocks on Earth found so far are the Acasta Gneisses in northwestern Canada near Great Slave Lake (4.03 Ga) and the Isua Supracrustal rocks in West Greenland (3.7 to 3.8 Ga), but well-studied rocks nearly as old are also found in the Minnesota River Valley and northern Michigan (3.5-3.7 billion years), in Swaziland (3.4-3.5 billion years), and in Western Australia (3.4-3.6 billion years). [See Editor's Note.] These ancient rocks have been dated by a number of radiometric dating methods and the consistency of the results give scientists confidence that the ages are correct to within a few percent. An interesting feature of these ancient rocks is that they are not from any sort of "primordial crust" but are lava flows and sediments deposited in shallow water, an indication that Earth history began well before these rocks were deposited. In Western Australia, single zircon crystals found in younger sedimentary rocks have radiometric ages of as much as 4.3 billion years, making these tiny crystals the oldest materials to be found on Earth so far. The source rocks for these zircon crystals have not yet been found. The ages measured for Earth's oldest rocks and oldest crystals show that the Earth is at least 4.3 billion years in age but do not reveal the exact age of Earth's formation.

The best age for the Earth (4.54 Ga) is based on old, presumed single-stage leads coupled with the Pb ratios in troilite from iron meteorites, specifically the Canyon Diablo meteorite. In addition, mineral grains (zircon) with U-Pb ages of 4.4 Ga have recently been reported from sedimentary rocks in west-central Australia.



28 posted on 04/28/2004 2:10:24 PM PDT by Blzbba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba
So all scientific dating and methods are either all right or all wrong, huh?
29 posted on 04/28/2004 2:10:36 PM PDT by GLDNGUN (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Comment #30 Removed by Moderator

To: blam
Is Geraldo going? 8^D
31 posted on 04/28/2004 2:11:15 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Drug prohibition laws help fund terrorism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SuperVillain
"But with humanity, 7,000 years can be the difference between stone tools and multi-speed blenders. So either way, the tests would be inconclusive."

True.

32 posted on 04/28/2004 2:12:04 PM PDT by Blzbba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba
radio carbon dating, and geological dating are wholey different--apples to oranges comparison. Both kinds too are subject to huge errors.

What I want to know is if evidence is found of a huge boat at 12,000+ feet, what will conventional science have to say?
33 posted on 04/28/2004 2:12:43 PM PDT by AnalogReigns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: swilhelm73
"Ok, so how exactly does a wooden structure in a nominally exposed position survive thousands of years?

Further, seeing as the world is still much colder then it used to be, wouldn't the ark then also have been easily visible for the thousands of years before the mini ice age?

Finally, if this particular area is so dangerous for modern climbers, wouldn't it have been still exceptionally all the way back to a landing on it by a ship? Both in regards to avoiding slightly under water rocks and also unloading a bunch of animals?"


Don't introduce logic into a discussion on faith!
34 posted on 04/28/2004 2:13:43 PM PDT by Blzbba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Comment #35 Removed by Moderator

To: raybbr
The carbon dating of the Shroud of Turin has been in some dispute since it was performed. Some will swear by it's accuracy and others make the claim that the fire the Shroud was subject to altered it's composition enough to skew the tests. I don't care.
36 posted on 04/28/2004 2:13:51 PM PDT by MagnumRancid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

Comment #37 Removed by Moderator

To: blam
Arslan reported an eyewitness sighting of the ark and took a photograph in 1989 from about 220 yards (200 meters) away. However, he couldn't get any closer...

Did Bigfoot stop him or something?

I don't doubt that Noah's Ark exists, but I don't believe this story.

38 posted on 04/28/2004 2:17:50 PM PDT by Aquinasfan (Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: swilhelm73
Maybe the same way a wooly mammoth is fully preserved with frozen food in its stomach: in an ice cube.
39 posted on 04/28/2004 2:17:52 PM PDT by AfghanIraqVeteran (IYAAYAS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SuperVillain; Blzbba; cryptical; Styria; blam
Carbon dating was developed to date dinosaur bones. ... Now, with dinosaurs, which were around for a bit more than 100,000,000 years, getting that close is no problem.

No, the half-life of Carbon-14 is so short that after 90,000 years there should less that 1/1000 of the origional Carbon-14 left to measure. Until recently the upper range given to Carbon-14 dating was 50,000 years, but in the past few years recent advances have pushed that to 90,000.

One problem showed up though. Scientists tested fossils using carbon-14 that were thought to be millions of years old. No fossils could be found that had the Carbon-14 depleted to the level that it should be. Several independent scientists of the evolutionist camp examined the fossils and indicated that the excess carbon-14 seemed to be endemic to the fossil and not from a source of contamination.

One FR evolutionist on this board suggested the fossils were contaiminated by ground water. But if that's true, it throws many of the radiodating methods into question, as nobody can be sure how much of the parent/daughter elements have drifted into and out of a fossil.

So yes, Blzbba is right. It doesn't make sense for Creationists to accept as fact dating methods regarding the Ark when we question the assumptions employed in those same methods to date other items. Nevertheless, finding and documenting a HUGH boat on top of Mt. Ararat would definitely be a win for the creationist camp.

CARBON DATING UNDERCUTS EVOLUTION'S LONG AGES

Diamonds are a Creationist's Best Friend

40 posted on 04/28/2004 2:20:24 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ASA Vet
Maybe.......but wouldn't it be interesting to find
some petrified elephant dung and emu poop up there on top of that mountain? ( :
41 posted on 04/28/2004 2:23:23 PM PDT by Winfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: blam

Yep, that's Noah's ark alright. Either that, or something else entirely. But it's definitely physical matter.

42 posted on 04/28/2004 2:25:41 PM PDT by Sloth (We cannot defeat foreign enemies of the Constitution if we yield to the domestic ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #43 Removed by Moderator

To: blam
Looks like a rock sticking out of the snow.

This will probably lead to nothing. It would be nice if they discovered something of interest up there instead of them coming home completely empty handed. I don't think they'll find what they're dreaming about.



44 posted on 04/28/2004 2:29:41 PM PDT by johnwayne (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #45 Removed by Moderator

To: DannyTN
"So yes, Blzbba is right."


Thank you very much!

Thanks also for the diamond link. But what about U-Pb (Uranium-lead) radio-isotope dating, which, to date (bad pun) has been shown to be extremely accurate?
46 posted on 04/28/2004 2:35:08 PM PDT by Blzbba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: AfghanIraqVeteran
That's the thing, as I mentioned - if the top of Mt Ararat is defrosting now, then it regularly defrosted before the little ice age.
47 posted on 04/28/2004 2:38:44 PM PDT by swilhelm73
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns
" Both kinds too are subject to huge errors. "

So too is the retelling of an ancient story for several thousand years before finally writing it down for posterity and subsequently believing said story word-for-word without question...



"What I want to know is if evidence is found of a huge boat at 12,000+ feet, what will conventional science have to say?"?


The weather started getting rough, the mammoth ship was tossed! If not for the courage of Noah and crew, the Ark would have been lost!

(apologies to the Skipper and Gilligan, who did an excellent job of landing the Minnow)
48 posted on 04/28/2004 2:39:16 PM PDT by Blzbba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba
"But what about U-Pb (Uranium-lead) radio-isotope dating, which, to date (bad pun) has been shown to be extremely accurate?

U-TH-PB DATING: AN EXAMPLE OF FALSE ISOCHRONS

"Excerpted the Conclusion fro above link

The concerns raised by Zheng [28] regarding U-Pb isochrons are warranted. At Koongarra a 207Pb/206Pb “isochron” produced from 11 hand-picked uraninite and galena grains, plus four whole-rock samples, yields an “age” of 863 Ma, the same as a near-concordant “age” from one of the uraninite grains. Nine weathered whole-rock samples yield an “isochron age” of 1270Ma, while 113 soil samples produce an excellent “isochron” with an “age” of 1445Ma. All of these “ages” are geologically meaningless. While the apparent isochron produced by the soil samples may be identified as a mixing line, produced by the mixing of radiogenic Pb with common or background Pb in the surrounding rocks and soils, even this explanation strains credulity because the samples come from up to 17km away from known uranium mineralization, and a few of the soil samples represent different rock types. Not only then has open system behavior of these isotopes been demonstrated, but apparent “isochrons” and their derived “ages” are invariably geologically meaningless. Thus none of the assumptions used to interpret the U-Th-Pb isotopic system to yield “ages” can be valid. If these assumptions were valid, then the 232Th/208Pb “age” of 0Ma for three of the five uraninite samples should be taken seriously. Creationists should therefore not be intimidated by claims that U-Th-Pb radiometric “dating” has “proved” the presumed great antiquity of the earth, and the strata and fossils of the so-called geological column. "

49 posted on 04/28/2004 2:42:04 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Sloth
Maybe it's the template for the 'Face On Mars'... LOL!
50 posted on 04/28/2004 2:44:55 PM PDT by BossLady (What do your choices cost you??????????????????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-91 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