by D.M. Murdock
April 28, 2010
Good news for bibliolaters! At last, there is evidence that the
Bible is true - well, actually, it's pretty much the same
"evidence," over and over again.
News agencies have been reporting that a Chinese and Turkish team of
"evangelical explorers" have discovered the "real" Noah's Ark, the
wooden ship recorded in the Bible to have contained two (Gen 6:19) -
or is it seven (Gen 7:2)? - of every animal on the entire planet,
including whales and kangaroos!
(Okay, so the Bible doesn't say
exactly that, but the story implies that the world's subsequent many
thousand species were reseeded after the flood by the happy animals
of the ark.)
Along with the announcement came pictures of a "boat"
supposedly found at 13,000 feet on Mt. Ararat in Turkey that has
allegedly been carbon-dated to around 4,800 years ago.
The reasons for doubting this alleged discovery are many, including
the plethora of previous purported "arks" dating back centuries, a
fact that immediately causes one to turn a jaundiced eye toward this
one as well.
There are also various scientific arguments against a
global or even local flood and the subsequent dispersion of all
human and animal life from Mt. Ararat. Moreover, the Bible itself
doesn't really state that the ark landed upon Mt. Ararat per se but
only that it rested in the "mountains of Ararat." (Gen 8:4)
it indicate where "Ararat" was at the time, so it may not have been
in Turkey. Also, the current structure in question has been pointed
out to look quite modern in its appearance, so freshly preserved
that it could have been created in the past couple of centuries.
In reality, there are many other possible uses for this structure,
if it is even on Mt. Ararat in the first place. Some have suggested
an old shepherd's hut, but most people are probably unaware that
there are "many monasteries" on Mt. Ararat, of which this "find"
could be a part, especially if it turns out not to be at 13,000
In addition, in other parts of the world we find stone arks or ships
on high places, apparently as burial sites in emulation of the
practice of sending off deceased royalty on burning boats, or for
Furthermore, Noah's Ark is quite evidently based on previous myths
from ancient Sumeria, Egypt, Babylon and elsewhere.
flood-and-ark myths are found in many parts of the world, as I
explain in my article "The Myth of Noah's Ark."
Where's the beef?
The Christian "evangelical explorers" who were looking for the ark
obviously assumed a priori that the biblical tale was true, calling
themselves "Noah's Ark Ministries International."
Hence, they are
blatantly biased when they make statements like the following,
FOXNews, which was quick to promulgate this tale:
examines wooden beams inside
what some are
nearly certain is the remains of Noah's Ark.
The significance of this find is that for the first time in history
the discovery of Noah’s Ark is well documented and revealed to the
The discoverers of The Other Noah's Ark(s)™ also believed the same
thing; indeed, some also went to elaborate measures to "prove" their
"finds" as well. The current would-be discoverers made other such
"scientific" declarations as:
There’s a tremendous amount of solid evidence that the structure
found on Mount Ararat in Eastern Turkey is the legendary Ark of
We are also told that,
"several compartments, some with wooden beams,
are said to be inside and could have been used to house animals..."
And we are shown a photograph of what is supposed to be one of the
"compartments" in which animals were allegedly held, complete with
apparently 4,800-year-old straw strewn about!
While the focus right now is on this wooden structure's supposed
age, size and features, we will be quite interested if its
discoverers find any kind of evidence that there were two/seven of
every animal inside this building and that it actually was a boat
that could float at any point.
'A boatload of skepticism is in order'
Various scholars and professors are being promoted in the press as
fairly gushing over the purported find, while others are, of course,
The fact any professors and archaeologists are giddy over
such a "discovery" is a reflection that academia has completely
dropped the ball when it comes to mythology - not realizing that
this biblical story is clearly an ancient myth and that any attempts
at finding such a structure therefore will undoubtedly prove to be a
waste of time and money.
Fortunately, not all scholars and experts are so quick to board the
But researchers who have spent decades studying the region – and
fending off past claims of ark discoveries – caution that a boatload
of skepticism is in order.
In this regard, one professional scholar did not mince words, as
also reported by MSNBC:
Cornell archaeologist Peter Ian Kuniholm, who has focused on Turkey
for decades, was even more direct - saying that the reported find is
Noted skeptical biologist Dr.
P.Z. Myers was equally pointed in his
dismissal of the "discovery":
Ho hum. I'm getting lots of mail about this ridiculous story on
[World Net Daily] and Fox claiming that Noah's Ark has been
discovered atop Mt Ararat. No, it hasn't.
This is yet another mob of
incompetent evangelicals hiking all over a big hill in Turkey and
credulously interpreting every rock formation and every chunk of
wood as proof that they've found a big boat.
The "science" is further called into question, as, naturally, there
is no geological evidence at all that Mt. Ararat was underwater at
As MSNBC likewise discussed:
Even if you assume the explorers found what they say they found,
linking the discovery to Noah's Ark requires lots of leaps of faith:
Is the carbon dating accurate?
Cornell's Kuniholm said he would like
to know who did the dating, especially considering that previous
tests reportedly came up with more recent dates.
Is it more
plausible that the structure is from a miraculous ark, or from an
ancient shelter on the mountainside?
Is there any evidence of a
catastrophic flood that rose to near the top of Ararat 4,800 years
"We know what's going on with Turkey archaeologically at that time,
and there's no major interruption in the culture," Zimansky
"There's not enough H2O in the world to get an ark that high up a
mountain," Kuniholm said.
Concerning this structure,
ABC News relates that George Washington
University professor Eric Cline,
"suggested it could even be a very
old shepherd's hut."
Cline also pointed out that the "wood should
just have disintegrated" long ago.
He further evinced that,
reasonable that [Noah] would have dismantled his ship to use the
wood for shelter" and that, "[i]nstead of Noah's Ark, I would be
looking for Noah's first house or something like that."
Indeed, how many "large structures" made of wood have survived
largely intact for almost 5,000 years? It would seem that this one -
if indeed that old - must be Noah's Ark, because it surely has been
Meanwhile, the edge of the wood in some of the images released by
NAMI looks as if it had just been hewn not long ago.
In this regard,
a carpenter on
Myers's blog comments:
The wood shown appears to be relatively recently milled and joined.
The planks and beams do not exhibit the type of drying and shrinkage
that occurs to wood over time, regardless of being in a deep freeze.
The surface of the wood doesn't show the different shrinkage rates
of hard and soft grain. Most noticeably the joint lines cannot be
millennia old and still be as close as the photos show.
It is further claimed that this structure must be very old because
it uses wooden pegs rather than nails in its construction.
it is possible that its builders didn't have metal nails, and this
sort of construction still occurs in many parts of the world.
Moreover, the fact that the carbon dating was allegedly done in Iran
also does not inspire confidence. China, Turkey and Iran make an
interesting combo in any event...
Even enthusiastic bibliolater scholars are unconvinced, such as
Liberty University archaeologist Dr. Randall Price, a veteran ark
hunter, who was involved at one point in this particular "discovery"
but who denies it has anything to do with The Real Noah's Ark™.
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. I and my partners invested $100,000 in this
expedition (described below) which they have retained, despite their
promise and our requests to return it, since it was not used for the
The information given below is my opinion based on what
I have seen and heard (from others who claim to have been
eyewitnesses or know the exact details).
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
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.
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
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 [stet] (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
So, there we have it.
As to the motive of this evident fake clearly
elucidated in Price's remarks, Myers concludes:
You can hardly blame the Turks around Ararat. There's a lot of money
being poured into the local economy from these numerous creationist
expeditions. It only makes sense to salt a few sites with chunks of
It would otherwise be curious why the Chinese would be so interested
in proving Middle Eastern myths - the only other way such a thing
could occur is because of religious conditioning, plain and simple.
Large swatches of people in practically every nation have now been
indoctrinated to believe that the megalomaniacal writings of one
particular "chosen people" represent "God's Word."
To a person
educated about the world's various cultures dating back thousands of
years, such a view is not only unscientific but also a result of
Meanwhile, this latest ark find is clearly a hoax - as they will all
turn out to be, because the story of
Noah's Ark is a myth based upon
other myths that constitute nature worship and astrotheological
knowledge dating back thousands of years.