... and just what is it in your little, closed mind that makes you declare something so juvenile? Have you taken the time to study the many years' worth of evidence that supports this 'find'? That the Ark is perched atop Ararat?
No, you say??
Do that...............then come back. Thanks for playing.
There's been decades of nonsensical non-evidence purportedly from Mt. Ararat.
This is presumably (and I'm extremely confident it will turn out to be) more of the same.
The concepts expressed in this text establish much of the basis for the Judeo-Christian theology, but Genesis is not a literal historical text, but a moral story. I suspect that is a lack of faith that prompts so many to seek physical evidence to support the word of God. The first five books of the Bible, including Genesis, were collated during the 5th century BC from four main sources, which themselves date from no earlier than the 10th century BC. Two of these, the Jahwist, composed in the 10th century BC, and the Priestly source, from the late 7th century BC, make up the chapters of Genesis which concern Noah. The attempt by the 5th century editor to accommodate two independent and sometimes conflicting sources accounts for the confusion over such matters as how many pairs of animals Noah took, and how long the flood lasted.
More broadly, Genesis seems to contain two accounts concerning Noah, the first making him the hero of the Flood, the second representing him as a husbandman who planted a vineyard. This has led some scholars to believe that Noah was originally the inventor of wine, in keeping with the statement at Genesis 5:29 that Lamech "called his name Noah, saying, 'Out of the ground which the Lord has cursed this one shall bring us relief from our work and from the toil of our hands.'"