What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

See Noah,s Ark pictures and story.

We can't be too sure yet. More study must be done, even if its 99% sure. (I'd like to know what that is based upon)

Plus, 4800 seems to be too small of a number.
Most sources place the flood at somewhere around 4000 BC, based upon earliest historical evidence (i.e. Sumerian writings, etc. ) So, shouldn't Carbon dating give a number of about 6000 yr?

Or, it could just be a barn or "work shed" from an early nomadic group.
(But, it does seem odd that they would build on top of a mountain)

Still interesting, though.
 
Yes, I agree with you. We need to wait and see. The carbon date should be close to 6000 years. The Ark was covered with pitch, so that should help preserve it. There is about 140 years missing from the Civil Hebrew Calendar. 5760 is equal to 5900. 2100AD = 6th day.
 
mdo757 said:
Atheist are screaming mad all over the world because of this news artical. To bad. :lol
Click to expand...
No, atheists are not screaming mad all over the world because of this news article. I'm sorry to disappoint you. :)
Have you spoken to any atheists about this article? I doubt it. If you had, you would know that some atheists are waiting to see what will happen, some wondering whether it's a hoax or not, but most laughing their rears off at the silliness of "finding Noah's Ark." Have you noticed that the search is led by an evangelical group? That's like a group of Hindus finding evidence of Shiva's existence, or a group of Muslims finding the fossils of the horse that bore Muhammad to heaven. Not very reliable. I would be more interested if it were a group of actual archeologists, not an evangelical group prone to bias, that found this ship that may or may not be Noah's Ark. You know what else screams BS?
the article said:
...say they are "99.9 percent" that a wooden structure found on the mountainside was part of a ship...
Click to expand...
Besides the bad grammar, the "99.9 percent" stands out as unlikely. If anyone says 99.9 percent they are guessing or exaggerating, and archeologists would never do that.

There have been many skeletons of boats found in the past. There is no reason to think it's the one that supposedly carried every single animal species on the planet. There are over 1,021,000 species of animals on this planet, not including birds, fish, and amphibians who would be able to fly or swim if there were a worldwide flood. If you multiply that by two there are over 2,042,000 species of animals that needed to fit on one ship, plus the food needed to feed them all and the fresh water needed to keep them hydrated. Assuming all of them did squeeze on the boat, and assuming they all survived the trip, most species would die soon after they got off the boat, due to lack of diversity in the genes.

Take the cheetah, for example. A while ago, the cheetah suffered a bad blow to its population, leaving very few cheetahs alive. They survived by inbreeding, and because of the inbreeding cheetahs share very similar genetic profiles. This has led to poor sperm, birth defects, cramped teeth, curled tails, and bent limbs. Also, because of similar genetic profiles, if one disease is capable of wiping out a few of them, it can also wipe out the rest of them because none of them have the proper characteristics in their immune systems to counteract it.

Therefore, if Noah's Ark was a real historical event, all species now would be suffering from the same problems, including us. But not many are. What does that tell you?

So, long story short (too late), no, atheists are not "screaming mad."
 
Your logic is lacking in all of your claims and your thinking is singular. If dino bones can last millions of years, Ha ha, then wood soaked with pitch under ice can last 6000 years.
 
Sure it can. But that doesn't mean it's Noah's ark. It could be some other boat.

And please, show me where my logic is lacking. I would like to know.
 
demented cookies said:
Sure it can. But that doesn't mean it's Noah's ark. It could be some other boat.

And please, show me where my logic is lacking. I would like to know.
Click to expand...

If your logic is that "it CAN'T be Noah's ark", then that's the flaw of your logic. If it could be some other boat, it could be Noah's ark as well. When you sound if it could ONLY be some other boat, that's the flaw of your logic.
 
I said in another thread about this, neither the Church nor God is lifted up by frauds. I'm NOT saying this IS a fraud, but things that came out after the initial media blitz were headed in that direction. It brings shame to the Church when people feel they must force God's plan through anything but honest measures. It seems that it would be very difficult to ever prove this affirmatively for any discovery of a boat, and absolutely impossible to prove the ark never was real.

No less believable to those who have faith. :halo Not essential for those that don't interpret the story as literal. :halo
 
Hawkins said:
demented cookies said:
Sure it can. But that doesn't mean it's Noah's ark. It could be some other boat.

And please, show me where my logic is lacking. I would like to know.
Click to expand...

If your logic is that "it CAN'T be Noah's ark", then that's the flaw of your logic. If it could be some other boat, it could be Noah's ark as well. When you sound if it could ONLY be some other boat, that's the flaw of your logic.
Click to expand...
I never said that. Don't put words in my mouth. I said it's unlikely it's Noah's ark, because that's only one boat when there have been millions of boats just like it. It's also unlikely in that Noah's ark even existed, because it's impossible that two of every single species on earth would be able to fit on one boat, and even if they did, most would have died from starvation or thirst, or their close descendants would have died from diseases that would easily spread and kill them all because of their similar immune systems due to inbreeding. There are so many more reasons, which I listed in my first post on this topic, which you would know about if you would just take the time to read it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top