Posted on 06/22/2009 7:52:45 AM PDT by Fennie
On the 2nd December 2002 Claudio Schranz of our group and alpine guide has been able to film clearly a beam of Noah's Ark protruding out of the ice on Mount Ararat. It was found at 4000m between the beginning of the Parrot glacier.
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
read most of his work and its totally unique. My favorite is the Anubis Gates
Wow, that’s pretty interesting, how is this movie just being published now?
“Look at second 33 of the vid.”
I dont think that can definitively be called circular saw marks based on a couple of curved lines.
Well, there is a single Mt. Ararat, but the Bible says that Noah's Ark came to rest "in the mountains of Ararat", which could put it pretty much anywhere in traditional Armenia.
From the Mespotanian perspective the description "the Mountains of Urartu" (as Armenia was called then) would be taken as those ranges south of Lake Van and Lake Urmia, rather than a pair of isolated peaks on a plateau far to the north.
Yes, I’ve read all of them, too. I think my favorite, although not really the most powerful, is “The Drawing of the Dark.” But they’re all remarkable.
I don’t know if that beam is from Noah’s Ark or not but we have to remember just what the bigger story is here. We’re talking about a rainstorm of truly God-like proportions. If God is truly a “God,” then He/She/It can do anything He/She/It damned well wants to do. If that calls for 14” of rain per hour, then that’s what we’d get. Did that actually happen? I don’t know but I kinda lean toward believing it until someone can give me real proof otherwise. Right now the question is a race between opposing theories and proof is still in the last turn.
Bring the beams down and use them in the construction of the Third Temple, wherein place the Ark of the Covenant.
Gopherwood? The Luther bible says pine.
Faith in God does not require one to ignore reason and science, nor does it require absolute literal interpretation of the Bible which, after all, was written by man, several hundred years after the events depicted. Science, reason, and Belief do not have to be mutually exclusive.
Was there a flood experienced by Noah? Most likely. Did it inundate the entire globe to a depth of over 13,000 feet? Highly unlikely.
You said — Do you really believe that the earth was inundated to an elevation of 13,000 feet above mean sea level?
—
You’re missing one big thing here, in saying that. Even those who do not believe in the worldwide flood and Noah’s ark *still believe* that the tops of mountains were, at one time, the bottom of the ocean..., just from the marine fossils they find at the tops of mountains... :-)
So, yes, if marine fossils can find their way to the tops of mountains, I don’t doubt that Noah’s ark can, too...
You said — Was there a flood experienced by Noah? Most likely. Did it inundate the entire globe to a depth of over 13,000 feet? Highly unlikely.
—
All you have to have... for that to be true in covering the entire earth — is — for a change in topography to happen. And that’s not unreasonable, scientifically....
I wonder what the volumn of water is that is trapped in the atmosphere at any one time?
Ron Wyatt hasn’t had the best of reputations with others in regards to his work, regardless of the fact that one may believe that Noah’s Ark is existent, somewhere, and that the Ark of the Covenant is also existent somewhere.
That’s just a note to people to be somewhat cautious about his materials...
You said — I wonder what the volumn of water is that is trapped in the atmosphere at any one time?
—
I can’t tell you anything absolute or definitive on that..., but I’m sure others could. But, in relation to the subject at hand, I can say that those who do study this issue and try to do so from a science and Bible standpoint — do say that the amount of water in the atmosphere would have been much greater in the past, plus water was also added to the “oceans” from underneath the surface, plus the land mass not having dramatic mountains as it has now, and lastly the extent of water being a lot more shallow, before the flood, than the ocean basins are now, after the flood.
All that would contribute to a very viable and reasonable scientific explanation for the waters covering the entire earth..., as the Bible says.
The volume of water trapped in the atmosphere has only one source - evaporation from the water on the earth's surface. Where would enough rain to drown the earth have come from unless the surface was under water when evaporation began?
How many people live up there?
You said — The volume of water trapped in the atmosphere has only one source - evaporation from the water on the earth’s surface. Where would enough rain to drown the earth have come from unless the surface was under water when evaporation began?
—
Those who speak to this issue and try to do so from a science standpoint in conjunction with what the Bible says — say that the atmosphere was a lot denser then, the climate a lot warmer then, the land mass a lot smoother then, the ocean a lot shallower then, and additional water being under the surface, and being released in volumes through tectonic changes that happened then.
That all contributes to a viable and reasonable science explanation for what the Bible says happened.
Don’t know if you saw this... :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.