Has Noah's Ark been found?

[Gracie]

I find this interesting. And...fuck those that want to poke your bubble. Faith is faith is faith. Period. Keep on believing, Nipper.

 

[Gracie]

Oh...and most don't believe in Atlantis either. I do. And those who think I'm a doofus...fuck 'em.

 

[fncceo]

We should reach our new home in a few thousand years...

 

[LittleNipper]

Some people say yes and some say no and some say it doesn't matter. Have the ones that say yes found anything? Have the ones that say no visited any sites? I see a real conflict of what should be factual information... Consider the following: Noah's Ark Has Been Found. Why Are They Keeping Us In The Dark?

They say if we are going to send humans to another planet we need to send about 1000 people. Or 100. I forget. Point is, how did Noah and his 3 sons and their wives repopulate the earth?

What else did they have to do? You do the math!

 

[LittleNipper]

Some people say yes and some say no and some say it doesn't matter. Have the ones that say yes found anything? Have the ones that say no visited any sites? I see a real conflict of what should be factual information... Consider the following: Noah's Ark Has Been Found. Why Are They Keeping Us In The Dark?

Wrong forum, having nothing to do with science or technology.

It isn't the wrong forum as archeology is scientific research. Simply because this explanation goes against what you believe is scientific, doesn't make you correct and me in error.

This isn't archaeology.

Are you an archaeologist?

Nope. Neither are you. What's your point?

My point is how are you to decide what is archeology or what isn't if you know nothing about it yourself?

 

[Crepitus]

Wrong forum, having nothing to do with science or technology.

It isn't the wrong forum as archeology is scientific research. Simply because this explanation goes against what you believe is scientific, doesn't make you correct and me in error.

This isn't archaeology.

Are you an archaeologist?

Nope. Neither are you. What's your point?

My point is how are you to decide what is archeology or what isn't if you know nothing about it yourself?

No, your point is you're upset nobody is taking you seriously.

Archeology involves archeologists, not religious wack-jobs.

 

[LittleNipper]

Some people say yes and some say no and some say it doesn't matter. Have the ones that say yes found anything? Have the ones that say no visited any sites? I see a real conflict of what should be factual information... Consider the following: Noah's Ark Has Been Found. Why Are They Keeping Us In The Dark?

A lot of stuff wrong here.First the obvious.
- How does a boat gets that high in the mountains? A flood? There isn't enough water on the planet to get to 6300 feet worldwide period. Not enough H2O exists here.
- Secondly how is this sourced. The only source I saw was in the bottom of the article that linked to the exact same article somewhere else. The article keeps on referring to "geologists" and "scientists" yet no peer reviewed articles were found. In fact this is what I did find.Noah's Ark Found in Turkey?
Only one "scientist" was referred to. I put it in airquotes because this guy does hardly publish outside his creationist circle Todd Wood And even he is taking a critical stance.
- Even the article itself poses more questions then it answers. Petrified wood 4800 years old? Fossilization, the process this refers to takes at best more then double that. Rivets, lamination? The article sites the find of those things as a proof of it being truthful. It's like finding a car in the center of the pyramids and drawing the conclusion from that, that "those Egyptians sure were smart".
I appreciate the link but ANY amount of critical thinking should dispel this.

You need to read the book of Revelation with an open mind and heart. Towards the end of that book GOD reveals the look of the new earth. And one is hit with the realization that mountains as we now know them will no longer exist and that oceans as we now know them will be no longer exist. Now since GOD is taking those who believe and trust in HIM and returning them to a pre FALL of man condition, and that the new heaven and the new earth will be much as GOD originally created them ---- and that the FALL of Adam is what brought about the FLOOD and the environmental changes we now accept as "normal," then obviously, there were no ALPS but only rolling hills. The FLOOD was so catastrophic in nature that it contributed greatly to the landscape we presently have now. I believe as part of the FLOOD that meteors, comets, and what have you hit the earth and could have been the result of planets within the solar system being clobbered as a result of the FALL of ADAM. That fall affected the entire UNIVERSE because Satan is the chereb who was originally placed in charge of earth (and that likely means all planitiods everywhere). When Adam fell Satan could now accuse him and bring all manor of attack upon him and that included harming planet Earth. Ultimately, the buck stops with GOD; however, GOD can and does allow Satan to have his way on occasions when it suits GOD's eternal purpose.

-Open mind? What do you consider open mind? The way I read it, the only thing you are claiming is that somehow the Bible answers my questions asked. In order for your view of the world to make sense and give you your "open mind" I have to reject all what is known about science, in order to fit your biblical story that is in fact a derivative of the epic of Gilgamesh, not an early Jewish story.
Not for nothing that isn't an open mind, that is in fact the opposite. Rejecting all explanations that don't fit the religious account.
- I gave you frankly more respect then the article deserved. I sourced your article and I answered specific problems I have with the article. The only comeback you give is "read the Bible".

Sorry, but it is far more likely that the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh is a distortion of the factual oratory "tradition" if not a later story then the Genesis account itself. The Bible story is far more concise and plausible ------ without a lot of details that make no sense. I told you matter of factly that mountains such as are your concerned didn't exist but were a result of the FLOOD. The earth GOD created was a beautiful place without the dangers of cliffs and boulders and lack of oxygen.

The Pre-Flood World: What Was the Original Creation Like?

Some people say yes and some say no and some say it doesn't matter. Have the ones that say yes found anything? Have the ones that say no visited any sites? I see a real conflict of what should be factual information... Consider the following: Noah's Ark Has Been Found. Why Are They Keeping Us In The Dark?

A lot of stuff wrong here.First the obvious.
- How does a boat gets that high in the mountains? A flood? There isn't enough water on the planet to get to 6300 feet worldwide period. Not enough H2O exists here.
- Secondly how is this sourced. The only source I saw was in the bottom of the article that linked to the exact same article somewhere else. The article keeps on referring to "geologists" and "scientists" yet no peer reviewed articles were found. In fact this is what I did find.Noah's Ark Found in Turkey?
Only one "scientist" was referred to. I put it in airquotes because this guy does hardly publish outside his creationist circle Todd Wood And even he is taking a critical stance.
- Even the article itself poses more questions then it answers. Petrified wood 4800 years old? Fossilization, the process this refers to takes at best more then double that. Rivets, lamination? The article sites the find of those things as a proof of it being truthful. It's like finding a car in the center of the pyramids and drawing the conclusion from that, that "those Egyptians sure were smart".
I appreciate the link but ANY amount of critical thinking should dispel this.

You need to read the book of Revelation with an open mind and heart. Towards the end of that book GOD reveals the look of the new earth. And one is hit with the realization that mountains as we now know them will no longer exist and that oceans as we now know them will be no longer exist. Now since GOD is taking those who believe and trust in HIM and returning them to a pre FALL of man condition, and that the new heaven and the new earth will be much as GOD originally created them ---- and that the FALL of Adam is what brought about the FLOOD and the environmental changes we now accept as "normal," then obviously, there were no ALPS but only rolling hills. The FLOOD was so catastrophic in nature that it contributed greatly to the landscape we presently have now. I believe as part of the FLOOD that meteors, comets, and what have you hit the earth and could have been the result of planets within the solar system being clobbered as a result of the FALL of ADAM. That fall affected the entire UNIVERSE because Satan is the chereb who was originally placed in charge of earth (and that likely means all planitiods everywhere). When Adam fell Satan could now accuse him and bring all manor of attack upon him and that included harming planet Earth. Ultimately, the buck stops with GOD; however, GOD can and does allow Satan to have his way on occasions when it suits GOD's eternal purpose.

-Open mind? What do you consider open mind? The way I read it, the only thing you are claiming is that somehow the Bible answers my questions asked. In order for your view of the world to make sense and give you your "open mind" I have to reject all what is known about science, in order to fit your biblical story that is in fact a derivative of the epic of Gilgamesh, not an early Jewish story.
Not for nothing that isn't an open mind, that is in fact the opposite. Rejecting all explanations that don't fit the religious account.
- I gave you frankly more respect then the article deserved. I sourced your article and I answered specific problems I have with the article. The only comeback you give is "read the Bible".

Sorry, but it is far more likely that the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh is a distortion of the factual oratory "tradition" if not a later story then the Genesis account itself. The Bible story is far more concise and plausible ------ without a lot of details that make no sense. I told you matter of factly that mountains such as are your concerned didn't exist but were a result of the FLOOD. The earth GOD created was a beautiful place without the dangers of cliffs and boulders and lack of oxygen.

The Pre-Flood World: What Was the Original Creation Like?

Here we go again. Rejecting everything that doesn't fit your belief. I've given you a few pointed questions, all of which you ignore if favor of spouting completely unsubstantiated and frankly unbelievable claims. The Bible is more plausible?????? Parting the Red Sea, a flood that covers the entire planet, etc plausible??? The epic of Gilgamesh was written 2100 BC. the book of revelation was written 65 AD. The book of Genesis was written between 1440 and 1400 BC. Somehow though Gilgamesh took it's story from those books? Nipper your "open mind" isn't working for me. If you aren't interested in backing up anything you say, but are perfectly happy with talking utter nonsense there is no point in talking. So against my better judgement one more time.
- Who was involved in this expedition that is so prestigious that you are willing to disregard the fact that no actual peer reviewed article was published. That the evidence to back up the claim is spotty at best?
(fossilization twice as fast as has ever been seen before) and that you have no problem with the expedition claiming to have found evidence of technology that wasn't seen again until modern times.

Your "open mind doesn't believe in GOD. I suppose you don't believe Jesus came back from the dead ---- I rest my case!

 

[LittleNipper]

It isn't the wrong forum as archeology is scientific research. Simply because this explanation goes against what you believe is scientific, doesn't make you correct and me in error.

This isn't archaeology.

Are you an archaeologist?

Nope. Neither are you. What's your point?

My point is how are you to decide what is archeology or what isn't if you know nothing about it yourself?

No, your point is you're upset nobody is taking you seriously.

Archeology involves archeologists, not religious wack-jobs.

There are enough people who take take the Bible seriously. There are plenty of professing Christian archeologists! Wouldn't you be surprised when they bring out the Ark of the Covenant

 

[rightwinger]

Some people say yes and some say no and some say it doesn't matter. Have the ones that say yes found anything? Have the ones that say no visited any sites? I see a real conflict of what should be factual information... Consider the following: Noah's Ark Has Been Found. Why Are They Keeping Us In The Dark?

It’s a conspiracy....a conspiracy I say

 

[LittleNipper]

Some people say yes and some say no and some say it doesn't matter. Have the ones that say yes found anything? Have the ones that say no visited any sites? I see a real conflict of what should be factual information... Consider the following: Noah's Ark Has Been Found. Why Are They Keeping Us In The Dark?

Wrong forum, having nothing to do with science or technology.

It isn't the wrong forum as archeology is scientific research. Simply because this explanation goes against what you believe is scientific, doesn't make you correct and me in error.

No archaeology was conducted. It was literally an expedition funded by creationists. Let's try this, undoubtedly this kind of in debt analysis of rock formations has a PEER reviewed article associated with it? The typical way archaeologist share their findings. Find me this article please. Better yet find me a single member of the expedition that had a PHD in archaeology or for that matter any scientific branch.

And evolutionists never fund expeditions. And the findings have been published even in secular publications.

 

[LittleNipper]

Some people say yes and some say no and some say it doesn't matter. Have the ones that say yes found anything? Have the ones that say no visited any sites? I see a real conflict of what should be factual information... Consider the following: Noah's Ark Has Been Found. Why Are They Keeping Us In The Dark?

It’s a conspiracy....a conspiracy I say

Everyone knows that conspiracies have never happened! Everything has always been on the up and up throughout history! Evolutionists are always trying to accomodate Creationists in every way.

 

[forkup]

A lot of stuff wrong here.First the obvious.
- How does a boat gets that high in the mountains? A flood? There isn't enough water on the planet to get to 6300 feet worldwide period. Not enough H2O exists here.
- Secondly how is this sourced. The only source I saw was in the bottom of the article that linked to the exact same article somewhere else. The article keeps on referring to "geologists" and "scientists" yet no peer reviewed articles were found. In fact this is what I did find.Noah's Ark Found in Turkey?
Only one "scientist" was referred to. I put it in airquotes because this guy does hardly publish outside his creationist circle Todd Wood And even he is taking a critical stance.
- Even the article itself poses more questions then it answers. Petrified wood 4800 years old? Fossilization, the process this refers to takes at best more then double that. Rivets, lamination? The article sites the find of those things as a proof of it being truthful. It's like finding a car in the center of the pyramids and drawing the conclusion from that, that "those Egyptians sure were smart".
I appreciate the link but ANY amount of critical thinking should dispel this.

You need to read the book of Revelation with an open mind and heart. Towards the end of that book GOD reveals the look of the new earth. And one is hit with the realization that mountains as we now know them will no longer exist and that oceans as we now know them will be no longer exist. Now since GOD is taking those who believe and trust in HIM and returning them to a pre FALL of man condition, and that the new heaven and the new earth will be much as GOD originally created them ---- and that the FALL of Adam is what brought about the FLOOD and the environmental changes we now accept as "normal," then obviously, there were no ALPS but only rolling hills. The FLOOD was so catastrophic in nature that it contributed greatly to the landscape we presently have now. I believe as part of the FLOOD that meteors, comets, and what have you hit the earth and could have been the result of planets within the solar system being clobbered as a result of the FALL of ADAM. That fall affected the entire UNIVERSE because Satan is the chereb who was originally placed in charge of earth (and that likely means all planitiods everywhere). When Adam fell Satan could now accuse him and bring all manor of attack upon him and that included harming planet Earth. Ultimately, the buck stops with GOD; however, GOD can and does allow Satan to have his way on occasions when it suits GOD's eternal purpose.

-Open mind? What do you consider open mind? The way I read it, the only thing you are claiming is that somehow the Bible answers my questions asked. In order for your view of the world to make sense and give you your "open mind" I have to reject all what is known about science, in order to fit your biblical story that is in fact a derivative of the epic of Gilgamesh, not an early Jewish story.
Not for nothing that isn't an open mind, that is in fact the opposite. Rejecting all explanations that don't fit the religious account.
- I gave you frankly more respect then the article deserved. I sourced your article and I answered specific problems I have with the article. The only comeback you give is "read the Bible".

Sorry, but it is far more likely that the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh is a distortion of the factual oratory "tradition" if not a later story then the Genesis account itself. The Bible story is far more concise and plausible ------ without a lot of details that make no sense. I told you matter of factly that mountains such as are your concerned didn't exist but were a result of the FLOOD. The earth GOD created was a beautiful place without the dangers of cliffs and boulders and lack of oxygen.

The Pre-Flood World: What Was the Original Creation Like?

A lot of stuff wrong here.First the obvious.
- How does a boat gets that high in the mountains? A flood? There isn't enough water on the planet to get to 6300 feet worldwide period. Not enough H2O exists here.
- Secondly how is this sourced. The only source I saw was in the bottom of the article that linked to the exact same article somewhere else. The article keeps on referring to "geologists" and "scientists" yet no peer reviewed articles were found. In fact this is what I did find.Noah's Ark Found in Turkey?
Only one "scientist" was referred to. I put it in airquotes because this guy does hardly publish outside his creationist circle Todd Wood And even he is taking a critical stance.
- Even the article itself poses more questions then it answers. Petrified wood 4800 years old? Fossilization, the process this refers to takes at best more then double that. Rivets, lamination? The article sites the find of those things as a proof of it being truthful. It's like finding a car in the center of the pyramids and drawing the conclusion from that, that "those Egyptians sure were smart".
I appreciate the link but ANY amount of critical thinking should dispel this.

You need to read the book of Revelation with an open mind and heart. Towards the end of that book GOD reveals the look of the new earth. And one is hit with the realization that mountains as we now know them will no longer exist and that oceans as we now know them will be no longer exist. Now since GOD is taking those who believe and trust in HIM and returning them to a pre FALL of man condition, and that the new heaven and the new earth will be much as GOD originally created them ---- and that the FALL of Adam is what brought about the FLOOD and the environmental changes we now accept as "normal," then obviously, there were no ALPS but only rolling hills. The FLOOD was so catastrophic in nature that it contributed greatly to the landscape we presently have now. I believe as part of the FLOOD that meteors, comets, and what have you hit the earth and could have been the result of planets within the solar system being clobbered as a result of the FALL of ADAM. That fall affected the entire UNIVERSE because Satan is the chereb who was originally placed in charge of earth (and that likely means all planitiods everywhere). When Adam fell Satan could now accuse him and bring all manor of attack upon him and that included harming planet Earth. Ultimately, the buck stops with GOD; however, GOD can and does allow Satan to have his way on occasions when it suits GOD's eternal purpose.

-Open mind? What do you consider open mind? The way I read it, the only thing you are claiming is that somehow the Bible answers my questions asked. In order for your view of the world to make sense and give you your "open mind" I have to reject all what is known about science, in order to fit your biblical story that is in fact a derivative of the epic of Gilgamesh, not an early Jewish story.
Not for nothing that isn't an open mind, that is in fact the opposite. Rejecting all explanations that don't fit the religious account.
- I gave you frankly more respect then the article deserved. I sourced your article and I answered specific problems I have with the article. The only comeback you give is "read the Bible".

Sorry, but it is far more likely that the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh is a distortion of the factual oratory "tradition" if not a later story then the Genesis account itself. The Bible story is far more concise and plausible ------ without a lot of details that make no sense. I told you matter of factly that mountains such as are your concerned didn't exist but were a result of the FLOOD. The earth GOD created was a beautiful place without the dangers of cliffs and boulders and lack of oxygen.

The Pre-Flood World: What Was the Original Creation Like?

Here we go again. Rejecting everything that doesn't fit your belief. I've given you a few pointed questions, all of which you ignore if favor of spouting completely unsubstantiated and frankly unbelievable claims. The Bible is more plausible?????? Parting the Red Sea, a flood that covers the entire planet, etc plausible??? The epic of Gilgamesh was written 2100 BC. the book of revelation was written 65 AD. The book of Genesis was written between 1440 and 1400 BC. Somehow though Gilgamesh took it's story from those books? Nipper your "open mind" isn't working for me. If you aren't interested in backing up anything you say, but are perfectly happy with talking utter nonsense there is no point in talking. So against my better judgement one more time.
- Who was involved in this expedition that is so prestigious that you are willing to disregard the fact that no actual peer reviewed article was published. That the evidence to back up the claim is spotty at best?
(fossilization twice as fast as has ever been seen before) and that you have no problem with the expedition claiming to have found evidence of technology that wasn't seen again until modern times.

Your "open mind doesn't believe in GOD. I suppose you don't believe Jesus came back from the dead ---- I rest my case!

What case are you referring to? "I believe in God so I don't have to back up what I say?" An open mind requires critical thinking. Critical thinking requires looking at evidence and come to conclusions based on that evidence. Me not believing in Jesus in no way absolves you from the responsibility to prove your conclusions. This is the difference between science and faith. Faith allows you to pick and choose what you accept. Science doesn't give me that luxury. I judged your article based on science, the place you choose to post it. If you ask me for an open mind, you have to give me actual verifiable facts. The Bible is not just unverified as a source, a lot of it flies in the face of actual stuff we can verify.

 

[longknife]

Some people say yes and some say no and some say it doesn't matter. Have the ones that say yes found anything? Have the ones that say no visited any sites? I see a real conflict of what should be factual information... Consider the following: Noah's Ark Has Been Found. Why Are They Keeping Us In The Dark?

This isn't exactly news. As the link points out, the site was first discovered in 1959. The Turkish government has forbidden in-depth scientific research ever since.

 

[Crepitus]

This isn't archaeology.

Are you an archaeologist?

Nope. Neither are you. What's your point?

My point is how are you to decide what is archeology or what isn't if you know nothing about it yourself?

No, your point is you're upset nobody is taking you seriously.

Archeology involves archeologists, not religious wack-jobs.

There are enough people who take take the Bible seriously. There are plenty of professing Christian archeologists! Wouldn't you be surprised when they bring out the Ark of the Covenant

Name one.

 

[forkup]

Some people say yes and some say no and some say it doesn't matter. Have the ones that say yes found anything? Have the ones that say no visited any sites? I see a real conflict of what should be factual information... Consider the following: Noah's Ark Has Been Found. Why Are They Keeping Us In The Dark?

Wrong forum, having nothing to do with science or technology.

It isn't the wrong forum as archeology is scientific research. Simply because this explanation goes against what you believe is scientific, doesn't make you correct and me in error.

No archaeology was conducted. It was literally an expedition funded by creationists. Let's try this, undoubtedly this kind of in debt analysis of rock formations has a PEER reviewed article associated with it? The typical way archaeologist share their findings. Find me this article please. Better yet find me a single member of the expedition that had a PHD in archaeology or for that matter any scientific branch.

And evolutionists never fund expeditions. And the findings have been published even in secular publications.

There is no such thing as evolutionists. There are however evolution scientists. The term evolutionists implies it's a movement. It's not, it's a theory in science. As to your question. Grants have been issued to scientists studying evolution. To prove certain aspects of it, or simply to gain a better understanding of it. In each of these cases the people involved PUBLISHED their findings and those publications were then scrutinized by other people in the field. I've yet to see any such thing from the people in this article. I don't mind who funded them, I don't even mind that they didn't have the required expertise to conduct this kind of research. I mind that their findings have not been in any way been exposed to the scientific process, yet it tries to present itself as scientific.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Some people say yes and some say no and some say it doesn't matter. Have the ones that say yes found anything? Have the ones that say no visited any sites? I see a real conflict of what should be factual information... Consider the following: Noah's Ark Has Been Found. Why Are They Keeping Us In The Dark?

Yes it has.

It has been found at LEAST ten different times in ten different locations by ten different persons or groups.

If you try hard enough you can be the next person to find it again.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Some people say yes and some say no and some say it doesn't matter. Have the ones that say yes found anything? Have the ones that say no visited any sites? I see a real conflict of what should be factual information... Consider the following: Noah's Ark Has Been Found. Why Are They Keeping Us In The Dark?

I saw a documentary on this and one of the most interesting things was they found large stones, huge, with holes in them. They theorized they were used for ballast and anchorage.

I have been intrigued by Robert Ballard's theory that the Mediterranean break-thru in ancient times at the Dardanelles and Bosporus at Istanbul that created the Black Sea is the origin of the Flood story.

Me, too. One of the flood stories, anyway. There are flood stories from all over the world. Glacial melting everywhere at some point, end of the last ice age?

Or the simple mundane fact that humans always tend to settle and build near water.

Just about every body of water from ponds to oceans flood at one time or another.

Therefore throughout history one would expect stories of floods to be a common theme.

 

[bullwinkle]

You need to read the book of Revelation with an open mind and heart. Towards the end of that book GOD reveals the look of the new earth. And one is hit with the realization that mountains as we now know them will no longer exist and that oceans as we now know them will be no longer exist. Now since GOD is taking those who believe and trust in HIM and returning them to a pre FALL of man condition, and that the new heaven and the new earth will be much as GOD originally created them ---- and that the FALL of Adam is what brought about the FLOOD and the environmental changes we now accept as "normal," then obviously, there were no ALPS but only rolling hills. The FLOOD was so catastrophic in nature that it contributed greatly to the landscape we presently have now. I believe as part of the FLOOD that meteors, comets, and what have you hit the earth and could have been the result of planets within the solar system being clobbered as a result of the FALL of ADAM. That fall affected the entire UNIVERSE because Satan is the chereb who was originally placed in charge of earth (and that likely means all planitiods everywhere). When Adam fell Satan could now accuse him and bring all manor of attack upon him and that included harming planet Earth. Ultimately, the buck stops with GOD; however, GOD can and does allow Satan to have his way on occasions when it suits GOD's eternal purpose.

-Open mind? What do you consider open mind? The way I read it, the only thing you are claiming is that somehow the Bible answers my questions asked. In order for your view of the world to make sense and give you your "open mind" I have to reject all what is known about science, in order to fit your biblical story that is in fact a derivative of the epic of Gilgamesh, not an early Jewish story.
Not for nothing that isn't an open mind, that is in fact the opposite. Rejecting all explanations that don't fit the religious account.
- I gave you frankly more respect then the article deserved. I sourced your article and I answered specific problems I have with the article. The only comeback you give is "read the Bible".

Sorry, but it is far more likely that the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh is a distortion of the factual oratory "tradition" if not a later story then the Genesis account itself. The Bible story is far more concise and plausible ------ without a lot of details that make no sense. I told you matter of factly that mountains such as are your concerned didn't exist but were a result of the FLOOD. The earth GOD created was a beautiful place without the dangers of cliffs and boulders and lack of oxygen.

The Pre-Flood World: What Was the Original Creation Like?

You need to read the book of Revelation with an open mind and heart. Towards the end of that book GOD reveals the look of the new earth. And one is hit with the realization that mountains as we now know them will no longer exist and that oceans as we now know them will be no longer exist. Now since GOD is taking those who believe and trust in HIM and returning them to a pre FALL of man condition, and that the new heaven and the new earth will be much as GOD originally created them ---- and that the FALL of Adam is what brought about the FLOOD and the environmental changes we now accept as "normal," then obviously, there were no ALPS but only rolling hills. The FLOOD was so catastrophic in nature that it contributed greatly to the landscape we presently have now. I believe as part of the FLOOD that meteors, comets, and what have you hit the earth and could have been the result of planets within the solar system being clobbered as a result of the FALL of ADAM. That fall affected the entire UNIVERSE because Satan is the chereb who was originally placed in charge of earth (and that likely means all planitiods everywhere). When Adam fell Satan could now accuse him and bring all manor of attack upon him and that included harming planet Earth. Ultimately, the buck stops with GOD; however, GOD can and does allow Satan to have his way on occasions when it suits GOD's eternal purpose.

-Open mind? What do you consider open mind? The way I read it, the only thing you are claiming is that somehow the Bible answers my questions asked. In order for your view of the world to make sense and give you your "open mind" I have to reject all what is known about science, in order to fit your biblical story that is in fact a derivative of the epic of Gilgamesh, not an early Jewish story.
Not for nothing that isn't an open mind, that is in fact the opposite. Rejecting all explanations that don't fit the religious account.
- I gave you frankly more respect then the article deserved. I sourced your article and I answered specific problems I have with the article. The only comeback you give is "read the Bible".

Sorry, but it is far more likely that the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh is a distortion of the factual oratory "tradition" if not a later story then the Genesis account itself. The Bible story is far more concise and plausible ------ without a lot of details that make no sense. I told you matter of factly that mountains such as are your concerned didn't exist but were a result of the FLOOD. The earth GOD created was a beautiful place without the dangers of cliffs and boulders and lack of oxygen.

The Pre-Flood World: What Was the Original Creation Like?

Here we go again. Rejecting everything that doesn't fit your belief. I've given you a few pointed questions, all of which you ignore if favor of spouting completely unsubstantiated and frankly unbelievable claims. The Bible is more plausible?????? Parting the Red Sea, a flood that covers the entire planet, etc plausible??? The epic of Gilgamesh was written 2100 BC. the book of revelation was written 65 AD. The book of Genesis was written between 1440 and 1400 BC. Somehow though Gilgamesh took it's story from those books? Nipper your "open mind" isn't working for me. If you aren't interested in backing up anything you say, but are perfectly happy with talking utter nonsense there is no point in talking. So against my better judgement one more time.
- Who was involved in this expedition that is so prestigious that you are willing to disregard the fact that no actual peer reviewed article was published. That the evidence to back up the claim is spotty at best?
(fossilization twice as fast as has ever been seen before) and that you have no problem with the expedition claiming to have found evidence of technology that wasn't seen again until modern times.

Your "open mind doesn't believe in GOD. I suppose you don't believe Jesus came back from the dead ---- I rest my case!

What case are you referring to? "I believe in God so I don't have to back up what I say?" An open mind requires critical thinking. Critical thinking requires looking at evidence and come to conclusions based on that evidence. Me not believing in Jesus in no way absolves you from the responsibility to prove your conclusions. This is the difference between science and faith. Faith allows you to pick and choose what you accept. Science doesn't give me that luxury. I judged your article based on science, the place you choose to post it. If you ask me for an open mind, you have to give me actual verifiable facts. The Bible is not just unverified as a source, a lot of it flies in the face of actual stuff we can verify.

Forkup, I liked Stephen Colvert's assessment of the Bible. Trump said his book, "The Art of The Deal" sold more copies than the Bible, and Colbert pointed that isn't true, but he also noted that they were BOTH "ghost written".

Note to literal believers: I read the Bible daily for it's wisdom, but accept many of its stories as not literal...so stuff it!

 

[forkup]

-Open mind? What do you consider open mind? The way I read it, the only thing you are claiming is that somehow the Bible answers my questions asked. In order for your view of the world to make sense and give you your "open mind" I have to reject all what is known about science, in order to fit your biblical story that is in fact a derivative of the epic of Gilgamesh, not an early Jewish story.
Not for nothing that isn't an open mind, that is in fact the opposite. Rejecting all explanations that don't fit the religious account.
- I gave you frankly more respect then the article deserved. I sourced your article and I answered specific problems I have with the article. The only comeback you give is "read the Bible".

Sorry, but it is far more likely that the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh is a distortion of the factual oratory "tradition" if not a later story then the Genesis account itself. The Bible story is far more concise and plausible ------ without a lot of details that make no sense. I told you matter of factly that mountains such as are your concerned didn't exist but were a result of the FLOOD. The earth GOD created was a beautiful place without the dangers of cliffs and boulders and lack of oxygen.

The Pre-Flood World: What Was the Original Creation Like?

-Open mind? What do you consider open mind? The way I read it, the only thing you are claiming is that somehow the Bible answers my questions asked. In order for your view of the world to make sense and give you your "open mind" I have to reject all what is known about science, in order to fit your biblical story that is in fact a derivative of the epic of Gilgamesh, not an early Jewish story.
Not for nothing that isn't an open mind, that is in fact the opposite. Rejecting all explanations that don't fit the religious account.
- I gave you frankly more respect then the article deserved. I sourced your article and I answered specific problems I have with the article. The only comeback you give is "read the Bible".

Sorry, but it is far more likely that the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh is a distortion of the factual oratory "tradition" if not a later story then the Genesis account itself. The Bible story is far more concise and plausible ------ without a lot of details that make no sense. I told you matter of factly that mountains such as are your concerned didn't exist but were a result of the FLOOD. The earth GOD created was a beautiful place without the dangers of cliffs and boulders and lack of oxygen.

The Pre-Flood World: What Was the Original Creation Like?

Here we go again. Rejecting everything that doesn't fit your belief. I've given you a few pointed questions, all of which you ignore if favor of spouting completely unsubstantiated and frankly unbelievable claims. The Bible is more plausible?????? Parting the Red Sea, a flood that covers the entire planet, etc plausible??? The epic of Gilgamesh was written 2100 BC. the book of revelation was written 65 AD. The book of Genesis was written between 1440 and 1400 BC. Somehow though Gilgamesh took it's story from those books? Nipper your "open mind" isn't working for me. If you aren't interested in backing up anything you say, but are perfectly happy with talking utter nonsense there is no point in talking. So against my better judgement one more time.
- Who was involved in this expedition that is so prestigious that you are willing to disregard the fact that no actual peer reviewed article was published. That the evidence to back up the claim is spotty at best?
(fossilization twice as fast as has ever been seen before) and that you have no problem with the expedition claiming to have found evidence of technology that wasn't seen again until modern times.

Your "open mind doesn't believe in GOD. I suppose you don't believe Jesus came back from the dead ---- I rest my case!

What case are you referring to? "I believe in God so I don't have to back up what I say?" An open mind requires critical thinking. Critical thinking requires looking at evidence and come to conclusions based on that evidence. Me not believing in Jesus in no way absolves you from the responsibility to prove your conclusions. This is the difference between science and faith. Faith allows you to pick and choose what you accept. Science doesn't give me that luxury. I judged your article based on science, the place you choose to post it. If you ask me for an open mind, you have to give me actual verifiable facts. The Bible is not just unverified as a source, a lot of it flies in the face of actual stuff we can verify.

Forkup, I liked Stephen Colvert's assessment of the Bible. Trump said his book, "The Art of The Deal" sold more copies than the Bible, and Colbert pointed that isn't true, but he also noted that they were BOTH "ghost written".

Note to literal believers: I read the Bible daily for it's wisdom, but accept many of its stories as not literal...so stuff it!

I get your point. In all honesty I was raised Roman Catholic. As such I have gotten an education in especially the NT. If you take out most of what is written and just look at it allegorically you can get something out of it. To this day, I look at the story of the Good Samaritan as something to aspire to. Look at people's actions more, then to whom people pray, and by extension what they say. That doesn't mean I should go soft on someone who tries to insert belief into the realm of science. If Nipper, or the people in the article want to find validation by trying to pose as scientists. They should follow the rules of science. That's the reason I answered Nipper in the first place.

 

[Syriusly]

Some people say yes and some say no and some say it doesn't matter. Have the ones that say yes found anything? Have the ones that say no visited any sites? I see a real conflict of what should be factual information... Consider the following: Noah's Ark Has Been Found. Why Are They Keeping Us In The Dark?

A lot of stuff wrong here.First the obvious.
- How does a boat gets that high in the mountains? A flood? There isn't enough water on the planet to get to 6300 feet worldwide period. Not enough H2O exists here.
- Secondly how is this sourced. The only source I saw was in the bottom of the article that linked to the exact same article somewhere else. The article keeps on referring to "geologists" and "scientists" yet no peer reviewed articles were found. In fact this is what I did find.Noah's Ark Found in Turkey?
Only one "scientist" was referred to. I put it in airquotes because this guy does hardly publish outside his creationist circle Todd Wood And even he is taking a critical stance.
- Even the article itself poses more questions then it answers. Petrified wood 4800 years old? Fossilization, the process this refers to takes at best more then double that. Rivets, lamination? The article sites the find of those things as a proof of it being truthful. It's like finding a car in the center of the pyramids and drawing the conclusion from that, that "those Egyptians sure were smart".
I appreciate the link but ANY amount of critical thinking should dispel this.

You need to read the book of Revelation with an open mind and heart. Towards the end of that book GOD reveals the look of the new earth. And one is hit with the realization that mountains as we now know them will no longer exist and that oceans as we now know them will be no longer exist. Now since GOD is taking those who believe and trust in HIM and returning them to a pre FALL of man condition, and that the new heaven and the new earth will be much as GOD originally created them ---- and that the FALL of Adam is what brought about the FLOOD and the environmental changes we now accept as "normal," then obviously, there were no ALPS but only rolling hills. The FLOOD was so catastrophic in nature that it contributed greatly to the landscape we presently have now. I believe as part of the FLOOD that meteors, comets, and what have you hit the earth and could have been the result of planets within the solar system being clobbered as a result of the FALL of ADAM. That fall affected the entire UNIVERSE because Satan is the chereb who was originally placed in charge of earth (and that likely means all planitiods everywhere). When Adam fell Satan could now accuse him and bring all manor of attack upon him and that included harming planet Earth. Ultimately, the buck stops with GOD; however, GOD can and does allow Satan to have his way on occasions when it suits GOD's eternal purpose.

-Open mind? What do you consider open mind? The way I read it, the only thing you are claiming is that somehow the Bible answers my questions asked. In order for your view of the world to make sense and give you your "open mind" I have to reject all what is known about science, in order to fit your biblical story that is in fact a derivative of the epic of Gilgamesh, not an early Jewish story.
Not for nothing that isn't an open mind, that is in fact the opposite. Rejecting all explanations that don't fit the religious account.
- I gave you frankly more respect then the article deserved. I sourced your article and I answered specific problems I have with the article. The only comeback you give is "read the Bible".

Sorry, but it is far more likely that the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh is a distortion of the factual oratory "tradition" if not a later story then the Genesis account itself. The Bible story is far more concise and plausible ------ without a lot of details that make no sense. I told you matter of factly that mountains such as are your concerned didn't exist but were a result of the FLOOD. The earth GOD created was a beautiful place without the dangers of cliffs and boulders and lack of oxygen.?

LOL you have said lots of things.

None of them supported by facts.

I really don't care that you believe in your fairy in the sky or the big book of fairy tales- but if you insist that this pile of crap is evidence that the Himalayas were mere foothills 4,000 years ago.....well then I call your pile of crap.