cyberjosh
Member
- Oct 19, 2005
- 3,472
- 11
Pogo said:
Oh boy. There's a name I was hoping not to see again (or atleast not used as a source for "absolute proof" of anything). Ron Wyatt has made many "intriguing" discoveries, including chariot wheels at the bottom of the Red Sea (covered in sea coral - as seen in the pictures he provided) - which I'm still stratling the fence on to be honest (I won't dismiss it off handedly as it *might* be a legitimate marine archeological discovery), but too many of his discoveries are uncorroborated and often are hyped, and thus one bad apple (or many in this case) ruins the whole bunch. His fringe scholarship has led to him not being taken seriously.
Although, he also has claimed to have found Noah's Ark in Turkey - so old the wood has turned to stone (fossilized), but in this case others actually partly agree with him (sceptical - but curious, though the location is about as hard to physically reach at Mt. Everest's peak [exaggerating a little]) that it is indeed some sort of boat or wooden structure because we have actual satelite photos of the "object" (see National Geographic's article on it). Pilots in military Air Craft flying over that site back around World War 2 (I believe) reported seeing it, and satelite images have been taken of it. But the problem is, none of this stuff hits main stream - and thus it is never sufficiently scrutinized, and then when people try to cite Wyatt for proof (as I once did) they shoot themselves in the foot because dissenters point out some of Wyatt's other not-so-convincing "finds" and/or theories. It's kinda playing with fire with Wyatt. He may not be completely off his rocker (the man got thrown in an Arabian prison for several months without hearing for "trespassing" just to find his artifacts that he says he has discovered - so I have no doubt the man is determined and sincere), but I just think in more than one thing he was mistaken - but it's hard to prove to other people some areas where his finds may (and I mean 'may' in the most ambiguous sense possible ;)) have been legitimate (like the chariot wheels, and the remains of the ark) because he has sort of sullied his reputation by claiming to have found one too many important things.
That's my take on Ron Wyatt. Interesting man? Certainly. The man will always fascinate me. Credible? Well like the tragic irony of the boy who cried wolf, when he actually hits something worth looking at, it's often too late. He also has found some interesting pillars on either side of the red sea, one matching the other which I have pictures of. It bugs me that no one other than him has looked at it (I wish they would - I think someone would find that he has found a few things genuine amidst his plenteous finds & theories) and taken interest in it, but it's difficult to make a credible statement on his finds. So though I find his "discoveries" intriguiging, I take them with a grain of salt.
