02 May 10
Originally posted by whodeyTell you what, if it makes you happy, you go on believing it's Noah's Ark, but I'm tellin' ya, the stuff in that video is not 4000 years old. It'll probably turn out to be a trailer for a film or something.
With all due respect, did the Hauslabjoch ice mummy have tons of lumber around him? It seems to me he had a few peices of wood that actually survived for thousands of years that were directly exposed to the elements.
02 May 10
Originally posted by whodeyNotice that you have clearly heard of other claims which you presumably now know to be hoaxes.
There appears to be yet another claim that Noah'a Ark has been discovered.
Of course, as the article points out this has not been verified by the scientific community.
More importantly, they don't seem to be in a hurry to get such verification.
However, if this is a hoax, it is an elaborate hoax. They have film of the 4000 year old structure buried in ice as well as aritifacts brought back. Film of the structure can be seen in the web site above. All I can say is, time will tell.
Not as elaborate as you might think. Filming some structure in ice would be relatively easy. The film does not prove that its 4000 years old. Nor does it prove that it is even on top of Mt Ararat.
It seems to me that this has the potential of being the greatest archeological find in human history because it would combine the well known historical accuracy of the Bible with the supernatural stories within it.
Not only would it not prove that the story of Noah had any supernatural elements, but I fail to see the relevance of any other parts of the Bible that may be known to be historically accurate. The Bible is a collection of books. Your statement is rather like saying that because some children's stories are factual, and one supposed fairy tale turns out to be factual, this would tell us something about children's books in general.
02 May 10
1 edit
The biggest problem with the whole claim, is the dating of the wood. (this is discussed in the article.)
If you are willing to accept scientific methods for dating wood, then you should be willing to accept the dating methods that essentially prove the Biblical history to be impossible (ie an 4.5 billion year old earth and all the dates along that time line).
If you reject the science that shows the age of the earth, you must reject the science that showed the age of the wood, or have a really really good explanation for why one is accurate and not the other.
02 May 10
Originally posted by whodeyI keep hearing mention of Josephus, but I cant seem to find any references to his writings that in any way suggest the historicity of Jesus.
Josephus? Was he not alive during the time of Christ? Was he not the author? In fact, he was not even a Christian.
Can you quote anything that does so?
All I have seen is references to the existence of Christians and their beliefs which I don't think is disputed by anybody.
02 May 10
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadFundamentalists accept every scientific method that confirms their beliefs, and they reject every scientific method that contradicts their beliefs, even if the same method is used.
The biggest problem with the whole claim, is the dating of the wood. (this is discussed in the article.)
If you are willing to accept scientific methods for dating wood, then you should be willing to accept the dating methods that essentially prove the Biblical history to be impossible (ie an 4.5 billion year old earth and all the dates along that time l ...[text shortened]... of the wood, or have a really really good explanation for why one is accurate and not the other.
Radiological time measurements, like C14, is a good example.
02 May 10
Originally posted by twhiteheadNot all fundamentalists believe that the text is saying that the universe was created in a literal 7 days. I thought we have discussed this before, but if you wish I can repeat my beliefs.
The biggest problem with the whole claim, is the dating of the wood. (this is discussed in the article.)
If you are willing to accept scientific methods for dating wood, then you should be willing to accept the dating methods that essentially prove the Biblical history to be impossible (ie an 4.5 billion year old earth and all the dates along that time l ...[text shortened]... of the wood, or have a really really good explanation for why one is accurate and not the other.
02 May 10
Originally posted by twhiteheadJosehpus lived from 37 BC to 100 AD. He was a first century Jewish historian of priestly and royal ancestory who is best known for recording the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 AD.
I keep hearing mention of Josephus, but I cant seem to find any references to his writings that in any way suggest the historicity of Jesus.
Can you quote anything that does so?
All I have seen is references to the existence of Christians and their beliefs which I don't think is disputed by anybody.
He wrote, "The Antiquities of the Jews", in the late first century. One passage, known as the Testimonium Flavianium, discusses the career of Jesus.
02 May 10
Originally posted by twhiteheadYes and no. If I were to discuver the Titanic, for example, my first duty would be to protect the site. As it tunred out, they did failed to legally secure the site of the Titanic as looter came in and had their way with the site.
Notice that you have clearly heard of other claims which you presumably now know to be hoaxes.
[b]Of course, as the article points out this has not been verified by the scientific community.
More importantly, they don't seem to be in a hurry to get such verification.
02 May 10
Originally posted by twhiteheadI am not talking about a stages hoax filmed off the mountain top, rather, I am saying that if there really is a boat of such size on top of the mountain top, for nonbelievers it must then be regarded as the greatest hoax of all time.
[However, if this is a hoax, it is an elaborate hoax. They have film of the 4000 year old structure buried in ice as well as aritifacts brought back. Film of the structure can be seen in the web site above. All I can say is, time will tell.
Not as elaborate as you might think. Filming some structure in ice would be relatively easy. The film does not prove that its 4000 years old. Nor does it prove that it is even on top of Mt Ararat.
02 May 10
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadSo in your estimation a boat of that magnitude might have been constructed on the top of the mountain that is 4000 years old? Is this reasonable?
It seems to me that this has the potential of being the greatest archeological find in human history because it would combine the well known historical accuracy of the Bible with the supernatural stories within it.
Not only would it not prove that the story of Noah had any supernatural elements, but I fail to see the relevance of any other parts of tale turns out to be factual, this would tell us something about children's books in general.[/b]
02 May 10
Once again I would remind everyone that I am in no way saying that I am certain that this is a legitimate find. However, if it is a hoax, is there any way to prosecute these people? Perhaps are archeologist member to this site has an idea. I say if it is a hoax these people should pay for their hoax.
02 May 10
Originally posted by whodeyThen you seriously mislead us in your first post. You said:
I am not talking about a stages hoax filmed off the mountain top, rather, I am saying that if there really is a boat of such size on top of the mountain top, for nonbelievers it must then be regarded as the greatest hoax of all time.
However, if this is a hoax, it is an elaborate hoax. They have film of the 4000 year old structure buried in ice as well as aritifacts brought back. Film of the structure can be seen in the web site above. All I can say is, time will tell.
Clearly not the same meaning as what you are now saying.
Sure, if they can get reputable scientists to verify the existence of a large 4000 year old boat on the top of a mountain then it would be either genuine or a very elaborate hoax. But that is not what you said in your first post. Not even close.
02 May 10
Originally posted by whodeyFirst it would have to be verified that it was a boat. Secondly, various reasons for its existence could be suggested. I guess we could suggest the Biblical account, but then we could include Jason and the Argonauts, pixies and various other possibilities too. It certainly would not immediately verify the Biblical account (which is hardly unique in terms of flood and big boat stories, nor does it even mention the specific mountain)
So in your estimation a boat of that magnitude might have been constructed on the top of the mountain that is 4000 years old? Is this reasonable?
One wonders how a boat gets burred on a mountain top that is subject to weathering. Though I guess if it is not at the top it is possible.
02 May 10
Originally posted by whodeyWhy should they pay? I thought you were american and thus valued free speech.
I am not talking about a stages hoax filmed off the mountain top, rather, I am saying that if there really is a boat of such size on top of the mountain top, for nonbelievers it must then be regarded as the greatest hoax of all time.