Noah's Ark Re-Rediscovered

[TZ]

A Chinese Christian filmmaker claims to have found the final resting place of Noah's Ark on Turkey's Mount Ararat.

Yeung Wing-Cheung says he and a team from Noah's Ark Ministries found the remains of the Ark at an elevation of about 12,000 feet (3,658 meters). They filmed inside the structure and took wood samples that were later analyzed in Iran. He claims the wood was carbon-dated to around the reputed time of Noah's flood, which would be remarkable since organic material should have long since disintegrated in the last 5,000 years.

Yeung said that he is "99 percent certain that it is Noah's Ark based on historical accounts, including the Bible and local beliefs of the people in the area, as well as carbon dating."

While news of the find is making headlines around the world, there's one part of the story that Yeung is conspicuously silent about: He is only the latest in a long line of people who claim to have found Noah's Ark. In fact, there have been at least half a dozen others — all of them funded by Christian organizations — who have claimed final, definitive proof of Noah's Ark. So far none of the claims have proven true.

http://www.livescience.com/history/noahs-ark-discovered-again-100428.html
people with religious agendas and lack of imagination=very bad science, if not outright fraud.
Here's what got me (and people think legitimate scientists are know it alls?)
"I can't imagine what it could be if it is not the Ark," said team member Arch Bonnema"...DUH! Science is about answering questions about the unknown, not trying to find data to support your personal beliefs.
Yeah, anthropologists always know exactly what they uncover when they find something new.
This kind of stuff really pisses me off.

[FiveGoodMen]

1. "Latest Ark finding is a fake"

"I was the archaeologist with the Chinese expedition in the summer of 2008 and was given photos of what they now are reporting to be the inside of the Ark. ...

To make a long story short: this is all reported to be a fake. The photos were reputed to have been taken off site near the Black Sea, but the film footage the Chinese now have was shot on location on Mt. Ararat. In the late summer of 2008 ten Kurdish workers hired by Parasut, the guide used by the Chinese, are said to have planted large wood beams taken from an old structure in the Black Sea area (where the photos were originally taken) at the Mt. Ararat site. In the winter of 2008 a Chinese climber taken by Parasut's men to the site saw the wood, but couldn't get inside because of the severe weather conditions. During the summer of 2009 more wood was planted inside a cave at the site. The Chinese team went in the late summer of 2009 (I was there at the time and knew about the hoax) and was shown the cave with the wood and made their film. As I said, I have the photos of the inside of the so-called Ark (that show cobwebs in the corners of rafters - something just not possible in these conditions) and our Kurdish partner in Dogubabyazit (the village at the foot of Mt. Ararat) has all of the facts about the location, the men who planted the wood, and even the truck that transported it."

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/04/latest_ark_finding_is_a_fake.php#comments

[TZ]

3. Yeah I read that too.

What really pissed me off was the "THEY FOUND THE ARK"!! commentary on the news the other night. NOT ONE HINT that its a scam. I am so sick of the media's lack of skeptical reporting on religion.

[old mark]

2. I think they found the REAL Shroud of Turin in it, along with several more heads

of John the Baptist and fragments of the True Cross.
There was an old sign nearby reading "This Way To The Ark ->".
Someone should start an Ark-Burger restaurant, selling burgers made from all the animals, and little plastic jesus statues that really cry...
People will believe ANYTHING!!!


m

[Speck Tater]

4. This just in: Arctic ice melt has revealed the location of Santa's Workshop. nt

[Meshuga]

6. Or better...

There is proof that heaven exists according to a photo taken by the hubble telescope:

[skepticscott]

5. Bummer

I was hoping we could check to see if all of that dinosaur poop was still on board...

[onager]

7. What a piker!

Everybody knows who REALLY discovered Noah's Ark - Roy Wyatt, of Wyatt Archeological Research. (Great acronym, eh?)

My buddy Ron Wyatt also discovered...

The post-flood house, grave markers and tombs of Noah and his wife
Sulfur/brimstone balls from the ashen remains of Sodom and Gomorrah.
Chariot wheels and other relics of the army of Pharaoh at the bottom of the Red Sea
The site of the biblical Mt. Sinai (in Saudi Arabia at Jabal al Lawz)
The rock at Mt. Horeb from which water flowed when struck by Moses
The site of the Crucifixion of Jesus
The Ark of the Covenant and the stones of the Ten Commandments
Christ’s blood, dripped onto the Mercy seat of the Ark of the Covenant beneath the Crucifixion site.

(Partial list from Wikipedia.)

So take THAT, you gol-durn arrogant atheists and Off-Brand religious heretics!

BTW, that "site of Mt. Sinai" turned out to be the hiding place for tons of gold, smuggled out of the Jerusalem Temple before its destruction circa 70 CE.

But when Ron went to get the gold, the government of Saudi Arabia had put armed guards around the site. Which also unfortunately prevented Ron from bringing back any proof. Don't you just hate it when that happens?

(Though he did convince one extremely gullible writer that his story was true, resulting in one of the most unintentionally hilarious books ever written).

Wyatt died years ago, but various Xian organizations are STILL pissed at him for taking their money to use for his "archeological expeditions." Google his name and you can still find the rants.

[charlie]

10. Ron's Ark is the only one with a visitor center

So you can strain your credulity without straining anything else. Enjoy a cold one and imagine Noah piloting an ark that looked like a misshapen yam.

[LAGC]

8. Why do they rely on carbon dating?

Why do they rely on the science of carbon dating for measuring the date of this find, when they ignore carbon dating when it comes to pinning the Earth at many millions of years old, not the 6000 years young Earth would have had to be if Creationism was true?

[laconicsax]

9. Two things:

First, it's standard fare for religious nuts to use scientific advances to their own ends and criticize the same advances when it disproves one of their claims.

Second, carbon dating isn't used to measure the age of the Earth--the Carbon-14 half-life is too short to be useful past 60,000 years. Potassium-Argon and Uranium-Lead (I think there are more too) are more common for geologic time scales.