Noah's Ark has been found with high probability on Mount Ararat

Noah's Ark has been found with high probability on Mount Ararat

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t2940-noah-s-ark-has-been-found-with-high-probability-on-mount-ararat

Noahs ark: New footages of the NAMI expedition in 2009
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNiXB0gfuns&t=21s

Evidence of Noah's flood
https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1635-flood-evidence-of-noah-s-flood

Philip Williams did visit the site at Mount Ararat, in Turkey, in 2014. 

First American Visit to the Mount Ararat Discovery
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAO_0E-J1lw

Second Deck Noah's Ark
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNxwCnfpQwE

This is the movie about the expedition of the NAMI team, in 2010:

THE REAL NOAH'S ARK DISCOVERED in 2010! NAMI expedition full documentary
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lc7F1Jgt2Gw

The NAMI expedition
Claims that the archeological site investigated by NAMI, is a fraud
Answers to the claim that the site is a fraud:
Expedition of Philip Williams
The Dutch expeditions
The pottery and miscellaneous artifacts found on the site on Mount Ararat
Pitch, evidence of the Ark found
The case of Joel Klenck
Miscellaneous links
The wooden structure at Mount Ararat
Lecture of Randall W. Younker Ph.D

Genesis 6:13So God said to Noah, “I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth. 14 So make yourself an ark of cypress[c] wood; make rooms in it and coat it with pitch inside and out. 15
Genesis 8:3 The water receded steadily from the earth. At the end of the hundred and fifty days the water had gone down, 4 and on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat.

Matthew 24:37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.

1 Peter 3:20 to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, 21 and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also

- Gilbert H. Grosvenor, Editor, National Geographic Magazine
“If the ark of Noah is ever found, it will be the greatest archaeological discovery in history and the greatest event since the Resurrection of Christ; and it will alter all the currents of scientific thought.”

Many remember the news ten years ago. Noah's Ark Ministries International (NAMI), mostly a Chinese team, did make an expedition to Mount Ararat back in 2009 and reached the remains of a large wooden structure at a 13,500-ft. elevation ( 4100 mts ) and dated it as 4,800 years old, claiming that it was with high certainty Noah’s Ark. It seemed almost too good to be true. This would be the most amazing archaeological discovery, and enormously back up the biblical story of Noah's flood, and give credence to the biblical account in genesis. 

Randall W. Younker Ph.D. Professor of Archaeology and History of Antiquity Director,  (Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Archaeology)
I think this discovery could be very important. I had not paid much attention to it before--indeed, was skeptical. But since I have been looking into it more, studying the images and talking to a number of people involved--including two people I know and trust who have actually been to the site, I am convinced it is not a recent fraud or fake--it has been up there for some time--so it is a legitimate archaeological site. As such, it deserves a careful study--if possible.

Starting at 41:50, Randall W. Younker talks about the recent expedition by Philip Williams.
https://vimeo.com/channels/987210/397152658?fbclid=IwAR2y0IZtJNkCyy8_-eAZCXak6ZWDkxLKZ8rH3xBkX6afFEwd3EPjhwFsliI

Soon after the news was announced to the world, in 2010, the controversy started. The major Young Earth Creation ministries rejected the finding as a staged hoax, perpetrated by  Kurdish workers hired by a Turkish guide, who planted large wood beams taken from an old structure near the Black Sea at the cave site ". I went with the opinion of the YEC ministries, as I thought they were trustworthy authorities on the matter, and did not investigate any further, and lost any expectation, that the ark would ever be found.

Abductive reasoning is the right approach in regards to historical sciences. People that think the site is not Noah's ark, have as well the burden of proof, to refute the site beyond a reasonable doubt, by providing BETTER alternative explanations of what the construction is, and how it got up there to a height of 13800 ft. ( 4100 mts ) I have not seen any of the claimers that the structure is a film-set proving their assertions. Empirical proofs, like photos, videos of the camp near the entrance, the wood being prepared and being brought up to the mountain, pitch being applied to the wooden wall, that would count as empirical evidence to substantiate a hoax-claim. Hearsay, letters that can be the product of forgers, personal attacks, empty accusations are not evidence. 



This is the best footage of the Chinese expedition:
Noahs Ark found in Turkey 7 Spaces were Discovered 探索隊新考據，七度空間曝光
May 6, 2010
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgziO6jc-3Y

The Hoax accusation was endorsed and supported by major YEC ministries, like Creation.com:
The ‘Hong Kong ark’ fiasco
https://creation.com/hong-kong-ark-fiasco?fbclid=IwAR21H33Qy38tN_bmqIyKN39tiNHB8_sMH0NijkmHxXTEEoc1ZUOi48A7l-A

Convinced that the discovery is not a hoax, Philip Williams did respond to the accusations of Don Patton and Randall Price:

A Response to Randall Price
http://arkapology.com/a-response-to-randal-price/?fbclid=IwAR14UCgQz4jViDlsig598Ta_XqbheoUfEfulIp4taKyLte20Y0rLjZWkkX4

After reading and listening to both sides, it can be concluded that Don Patton's version does not provide compelling reasons. 

The NAMI team that visited the site on mount Ararat in 2010 did report seven different chambers. The amount of wood, huge curved walls is hard to estimate.  Philip Williams did enter the site in 2014 at an entrance that was uncovered in 2011. I did analyze his video footage, and took a screenshot of every new sequence, showing different kinds of wooden planks with different sections, cuts, and different sizes. I did catalogize at least 150 different planks, including massive wood stairs carved from massive wood trunks. All buried deep below volcanic rocks and Ice. Wood, that looks very old. The structure is massive. Even if pictures don't do justice to fathom the size of the site and construction, it can be seen that the wooden walls are huge and massive.  

Many pictures show spider webs, and at the NAMI movie, a living spider crawling around. The spider webbing was referred to as proof that the structure is a hoax actually proves it is not.
There are no problems with spiders in such high altitudes: Zoogeography of Arachnida 2018, page 866 Concerning the mountains of Eurasia, the high-altitude spiders are relatively well-known (Pyrenees, Alps, Pirin, and other Bulgarian mountains, Caucasus, and the Himalayas). As a model for comparison, we use the most numerous and varied family in all high mountains – Linyphiidae (Erigoninae included). Over 2200 m in separate mountain systems, the following genera, and species of Linyphiidae are represented: Pyrenees – 39 genera, 65 species Alps – 44 genera, 101 species Rila – Pirin – Vitosha – Stara planina – 30 genera, 55 species Caucasus – 51 genera, 84 species Himalayas – 21 genera, 52 species


If the structure was recently built at 13, 500 ft. in snow and ice, how would the web have come about? Did the hoaxsters place the web there by hand? Really? Wow! I would sure like to see how that was done. Or, are we to believe that a spider living near the construction site climbed into the recesses of the structure soon after the workers left the area and built web and an old looking web at that? Both of these ideas are fanciful at best! The web itself shows that either the spider web was there from the beginning and has been preserved in a state of deep freeze or it was made long before recent times and the structure has remained undisturbed for many years. Neither option fits the hoax theory. Thus, this find should be looked at with much greater care.

The wooden structures at the site on Mount Ararat

If someone wants to deny that the structure is Noah's ark, good alternative reasons will have to be found to explain how this structure did end up on 4100 mts on Mount Ararat. Including not only the various kinds of old wood but also the pottery, the artifacts that look VERY old, the pitch on the wooden walls that match the biblical description. 

The major claim that someone hauled huge wooden structures up the mountain during the offseason (non-summertime), and set them into a glacial crevasse is ridiculous at best.
All that wood could not have been hauled way up there and assembled to look like the wreckage of a vessel, then covered with glacier and volcanic rock.
https://dancingfromgenesis.wordpress.com/2010/05/18/background-real-name-turkish-guide-parasut-ahmet-ertugrul-noahs-ark-discoverer-mount-ararat-turkish-mountain-exploration-first-time-discovered-nami-documented-wooden-wreckage-noahs-ark-climb-2008/

Everyone has ever climbed Mount Ararat would know the terrain above 3,800m is so rugged that you cannot carry anything more than a backpack. We have communicated to Mr. Muhsin Bulut, the Director of Cultural Ministries, Agri Province, where Mount Ararat locates and sought his opinion about the possibility of transporting a lot of timber and planting a large wood structure high on an altitude of 4,000m. He assured us that the mountain is a restricted area and strictly monitored; therefore, such an act was impossible.

Nobody would be able to construct a place of that huge size at over 4000mts altitude, almost without oxygen, and very low temperatures, for four years, with just a small team of four to nine people, two weeks per year, during the summertime. There are some huge wooden walls, up to 5 mts high and 12 mts wide, and hundreds of large wooden planks, all with different cuts and sizes, and wooden nails. The NAMI team reported 7 distinct rooms, some very large. Sorry, but no forger would be able to construct such a site. Even worse, they claim that Parasut did supervise the construction from distance by cell phone !! That's nothing short than ridiculous...

I am open to being convinced that Don Patton's narrative is true but only based on HARD EVIDENCE, not hearsay, anonymous " witnesses", storytelling, and so forth.

It is remarkable that In 1955 French Industrialist Fernand Navarra did find a wood plank in a cravasse, on Mount Ararat, at 13500 feet, precisely the same altitude as the NAMI team and Philip Williams did find the structure. Fernand Navarra brought back a reddish wood beam from Ararat, and under argon and potassium testing put the wood at 5,000 years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMV6MmcgMjw

The hoax hypothesis would be confirmed, and the burden of proof met if the claimants would be able to provide footage and pictures of the construction camp, wood outside the entrance, being stocked and prepared to be moved entering the building site. Something like Navarra's footage, where he removes wood from the site:


To me, it seems that Don Patton's motivation is to be able to keep rising funds, and continuing to make expeditions to Mount Ararat. Obviously, he is not happy that he was denied to keep participating at the NAMI expedition for reasons that he details in his report.

A reply from Philip Williams:
The time of yearly construction that the author's unidentified source mentions has somehow expanded from 2 weeks mentioned previously to one month here. Perhaps the extra 2 weeks are seen here as needed for hauling and carrying the timbers. That is going to be a lot of traffic on the Federation Trail. Even if the government didn’t know, surely many in Ararat Village and Elli Nomad Village as well as Dogubayazit did notice all those large trucks and horses headed up and down the mountain. The authors’ Ark Search LLC use these same porters and horses. It is very difficult to operate at 4,000 plus meters. Surely Parasut would have thought of processing the wood to make it look old before carrying it to the site. But wasn’t he suppose to have brought old wood to the site! In any case, rubbed ash isn’t going to adhere to the wood like tar pitch or a coat of paint. In truth, no amount of onsite processing is going to make the wood look old, or obtain the appearance of the wood shown in NAMI’s photos. (See below.) The numerous tons of rocks that would need to be removed would be piled up and would surely be falling on the structure. But due to the now buried built structure, the exterior should still have a very large pile of leftover rocks. Anyone, including Price and Patton should easily find Parasut’s site.

The last step is the most unlikely one claimed to have occurred by Don Patton:
Know that the authors are themselves involved with a rival project on the summit of Mount Ararat that does involve melting or removing snow whether with fire and gas I don’t know. Though extremely dangerous, what the authors’ team are doing at their rival project on the summit and what is proposed here is not so difficult. But what would be incredibly challenging is removing the many tons of frozen volcanic rock overlying the buried site that NAMI shows in their videos. From my own experience, I know that merely visiting this site is trepidatious. But it is the melting of the ice that loosens the rocks that makes it so very dangerous even when one is not deliberately melting the ice. Carrying large timbers to these heights and transporting them by hand across a dangerous canyon would be most challenging, but the dangers and difficulties of that would be nothing like digging into the frozen ground to remove these very large but unstable rocks. Due to the special needs of operating at these heights that would require a far larger operation than the authors propose here. Another danger are the large rocks that regularly tumble down the mountain, which the authors themselves experienced in their attempt to visit what they believe to be the site.





Questions that advocate, that the structure is a hoax or that it was build in more recent times, a film-set staged, must answer providing good reasons and arguments to support such claims. 

Navarra did probably find remains of Noah's Ark back in 1955. He did film the removal of wood from the site. The hoax hypothesis would be confirmed, and the burden of proof met if the claimants would be able to provide footage and pictures of the construction camp, wood outside the entrance, being stocked, and prepared to be moved entering the building site. Something like Navarra's footage, where he removes wood from the site. The movie demonstrates the difficulty to move just one wooden trunk. 
The Quest for Noah's Ark ∞ History ∞ Part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMs0zRI79pQ


1. How could such a structure have been constructed at 13,800 feet in the permanent snow cap? I have snapshots of each wood plank with different cuts. I did count just in the site which Philip Williams visited, over 150 planks of different sizes and cuts. Panda lee reported one plank, in his expedition in 2008, to be 20 meters long. Dispersed and buried in ice deep below the surface. In the access tunnels and wood chambers, there are massive stairs made of wood trunks, each at least with a weight of over 200 lbs, buried in ice. There are huge wood walls impregnated with pitch, and curved, like a boat hull. How was all this constructed up there?  

2. How could it have been buried so deep?. Under 20-30 feet of frozen volcanic rock and ice? Sub-freezing temperatures make it virtually impossible to construct a large ship under those conditions.

3. How could it have been made, considering that it is too unstable and dangerous in its location? One site leans precariously on a ledge, another on the side of a glacier slowing moving down the mountain. Large rocks regularly tumble the mountain burying the structure and threatening the life of workers.

4. It is a huge structure. It is in at least two pieces which together appear to be about the size of Noah’s Ark (450 feet long). How could it have been made, dragging that much timber that high, fabricating and assembling all the intricate wooden joints ? is it not too much for this height and temperature?

5. It is too complicated. It has a bowed hull, three decks, numerous square deep wooden joints for square wooden nails, tongue and grooved joined boards with evidence of handcraft: Would it not be too intricate and complex to construct under such difficult conditions?

6. It contains pottery, food remains skeletons of animals and various artifacts of ancient age.

7. If it is of recent construction, why is there surface patina on it which does not exist on recently fabricated boards, and there is no known way to fabricate it?

8. Noah and his family worked on level ground for perhaps 120 years. How could someone build this big ship on a high mountain under these seemingly impossible conditions in the few weeks per year after meltwater stops flowing and before winter snow prevents access to the sites?

9. How could the structure be of recent construction, in snow and ice, how would the spider webs there have come about? Did the hoaxsters place the web there by hand? Really? Wow! I would sure like to see how that was done. Or, are we to believe that a spider living near the construction site climbed into the recesses of the structure soon after the workers left the area and built a web and an old looking web at that? Both of these ideas are fanciful at best! The web itself shows that either the spider web was there from the beginning and has been preserved in a state of deep freeze or it was made long before recent times and the structure has remained undisturbed for many years. Neither option fits the current hoax theory.  I still see no problem of spiders in such high altitudes:
Zoogeography of Arachnida 2018, page 866
Concerning the mountains of Eurasia, the high-altitude spiders are relatively well-known (Pyrenees, Alps, Pirin, and other Bulgarian mountains, Caucasus, and the Himalayas). As a model for comparison, we use the most numerous and varied family in all high mountains – Linyphiidae (Erigoninae included). Over 2200 m in separate mountain systems, the following genera and species of Linyphiidae are represented: Pyrenees – 39 genera, 65 species
Alps – 44 genera, 101 species Rila – Pirin – Vitosha – Stara planina – 30 genera, 55 species Caucasus – 51 genera, 84 species Himalayas – 21 genera, 52 species

10. How can advocates that claim the site is a Hoax based on articles like Answers in Genesis be so sure that the radiocarbon dating done so far is accurate when we know otherwise? Inaccuracies in radiocarbon dating
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/06/180605112057.htm
June 5, 2018
Cornell University

Radiocarbon dating is a key tool archaeologists use to determine the age of plants and objects made with organic material. But new research shows that commonly accepted radiocarbon dating standards can miss the mark -- calling into question historical timelines.

Responding to claims that the archeological site investigated by NAMI, is a fraud

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t2940-noah-s-ark-has-been-found-with-high-probability-on-mount-ararat#7426

Websites claiming that the finding on Mount Ararat is a hoax:

http://www.mountainararattrek.com/ark/arkfraud3b.htm

The Great Noah's Ark Hoax
https://archaeologynewsnetwork.blogspot.com/2010/04/great-noah-ark-hoax.html?m=1&fbclid=IwAR3ooF1H3c513-b6Zkf0nRbJ3EVHGVQ_03F2u-gybajZjIfspos6F2URHKA

The Search for Noah's Ark with Dr. Don Patton
https://www.bible.ca/ark/NAMI-noahs-ark-discovered-found-made-in-china-fraud/NAMI-noahs-ark-discovered-dr-don-patton-randall-price-made-in-china-fraud-20-nov-2010.htm

The Noah's Ark Discovery Fraud by Paraşut, NAMI, MEDIA Exposed
http://mountainararattrek.com/ark/?fbclid=IwAR08kN12-ysK8UeZw4yDo83T6zPtZ6OjYPdOf7G48hisJGarHOgoJublKQg

Warning Against Climbing Mount Ararat!
https://www.mountararattrek.com/mountararatwarning.htm?fbclid=IwAR1XnwSx2lM-RqN2SOkKogZu1ya6bBDJTp878CbLw7trWqDFxKQUj9EaRSU

2010 Updates
https://www.noahsarksearch.com/2010/12/2010-updates/

The ‘Hong Kong ark’ fiasco
https://creation.com/hong-kong-ark-fiasco?fbclid=IwAR21H33Qy38tN_bmqIyKN39tiNHB8_sMH0NijkmHxXTEEoc1ZUOi48A7l-A

Don Patton's story:
https://web.archive.org/web/20170621214113/http://www.worldofthebible.com/Documents/Fall2010.pdf

The Turkish Guides and the Noah’s Ark Discovery Fraud
http://www.mountararattrek.com/kurdishguides_20120224.pdf

Noah's Ark Found in Turkey?
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/4/100428-noahs-ark-found-in-turkey-science-religion-culture/

https://kgov.com/ark-fraud

Noah's Ark Found in Turkey? Is this real?
https://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/noahs_ark_found.html
Yes, "Noah's Ark" has been found again. Only this time, it seems to be really made of wood, rather than some geological formation. The main question is how the wood got to 13,000 feet up Mt. Ararat. As a believer in the local flood interpretation of Genesis, I don't believe that Noah's ark came to rest 13,000 feet up any mountain. Most likely, it landed in some foothill area and was disassembled for housing and/or firewood. So, confirming that the wood belonged to a 4,800 year old boat at the 13,000 foot elevation of Mt. Ararat would require a major paradigm shift for me. However, I would be more than willing to make such a paradigm shift should the discovery turn out to be authentic. Archeologist Dr. Randall Price seems convinced that the "ark" is an elaborate hoax perpetrated by a Kurdish guide, to extract money from gullible Christians. Time will tell, when scientists are allowed to travel to the site and examine the evidence. I am not going to hold my breath on this one.



A reply of Philip Williams in regards to this letter:
http://kingdompropheticsociety.org/m/blogpost?id=6363943%3ABlogPost%3A41334
My connection to NAMI and Parasut was due to my learned defense of their discovery. (See the Mt. Ararat Discovery website below and the Epilogue of my book.) I invited them to present their discovery privately before a learned audience, which resulted in an invitation to address the 2010 National Apologetics Conference. Following that Drs. Price and Don Patton submitted a defense of their charges of fraud. They claim to have found a piece of wood of recent construction at the site of the discovery. But the small, black-charred board they presented was nothing like the huge, surface-rotted brown timbers seen in NAMI's photos.

I wrote Liberty University's top officials, asking whether they approve of their professor's use of anonymous sources to make serious and damaging charges. The university promised to look into the matter. Soon after this, an "affidavit" appeared on Price's website. The letter was written by two brothers with the names Davut and Ergan. According to the affidavit, the brothers acknowledged having helped build a movie set on the mountain. They supposed it was for a movie, but were upset to learn that it had been claimed as the remains of Noah's Ark. It was a serious charge from someone giving no address, employer, or last name!

Before he saw the affidavit, Price had probably never heard the names Davut and Ergan. At least, he seemed shocked when an angry Davut and Ergan Gimrin, the only licensed climbers in Turkey who are brothers with those first names, appeared on NAMI's website. They used their Turkish identification cards and signatures on the cards to demonstrate that Price's letter was a forgery. Within hours of the brothers' recorded video appearance on NAMI's website, Price removed the "affidavit," promising to look into its source.

We see that not only does this Liberty University Professor make charges of fraud based on anonymous sources, he doesn't hesitate to make them based on sources that he himself does not know. Many of us waited to learn what Price would tell us about the source of the forged letter with its claims against NAMI's Ark discovery. But instead of looking into the source of his forged letter, I learned that Price addressed the appearance of Davut and Ergan on NAMI's website, claiming they disputed the letter due to death threats from my friend Parasut. That is not what I learned from Davut and Parasut when I visited their home. (See photo above.)

As to the source of the forged letter, Price might check with the secretary of Murat Camping (see photo above right). That should not be difficult since Murat Camping is the base of Price's own ventures on Mt. Ararat. As Price himself well knows, the unnamed masked source of his allegations against NAMI's discovery is also the owner of Murat Camping.

Noah’s Ark Confession Repudiated
https://www.bibleplaces.com/blog/2011/01/noahs-ark-confession-repudiated/
The Hong-Kong based organization Noah’s Ark Ministries International (NAMI) announced in April that they had discovered Noah’s Ark.  Their press release included brief video clips showing wooden beams of the alleged ark.  Yet many noted major problems with their purported discovery.  These suspicions appeared to be confirmed with the release two weeks ago of a letter written by two Turkish brothers who confessed to constructing “the ark” for what they thought was a movie set.
The latest turn in the saga is that NAMI has announced that the confession sent to Randall Price was forged.  They have a statement by the brothers claiming that they never wrote the letter.
A few observations:
1. An outside observer can hardly judge as to what the truth is with regard to the letter.  It’s certainly possible that someone forged the letter.  It should be noted that the letter is in Turkish, and since all “ark hunters” are outside Turkey, its creation would have required more than a casual effort.  It did strike me originally that the signatures appear to have been signed by the same person, though that might not be significant if one or both was illiterate.
2. NAMI clearly believes their reputation is on the line, as is apparent from the effort they have taken to refute the letter.  Their response is currently the front page on their website.
3. NAMI has spent a lot of money in their story and they expect to reap a fortune with the production of future “documentaries” and souvenirs.  An outside investigator would certainly want to consider the possibility that they invested additional money into the Turkish brothers so that they would deny
writing the letter.
4. Randall Price has removed the letter from his website “pending further investigation of its source.”  The Google-cached page still shows the letter and translation.  (Also here and here.)
5. NAMI essentially claims that Price forged the letter.  They write, “His actions have been completely against the basic principles of a true professing Christian and defying the law.”  Did he defy the law by attacking their work or by posting the letter?  Clearly they intend to suggest that he personally was involved in its forgery.  I believe that their charge is absolutely baseless, but they are now on record for recognizing the difference between truth and error as well as the judgment men face for their actions.
6. The determination that the letter is a forgery does not constitute evidence for the validity of the discovery.








Noah’s Ark PaleoBabble Update

https://www.liberty.edu/divinity/faculty/randall-price/?fbclid=IwAR3t-lbef3a_ijH2TWb2aJ0LPh0tiJe4TJLAdYrYBdSlYgiBmnQQKxDEgfg

https://web.archive.org/web/20101219204225/http://michaelsheiser.com/PaleoBabble/2010/04/noahs-ark-paleobabble-update

Now the sad part. I also got an email today from one of Randall Price’s students. The email contains a message from Dr. Price about this expedition. (Dr. Price, as some of you may recall, has been doing a lot of searching for the ark lately.) Here is an excerpt from his message:

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 expedition. 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 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.

In short, Randall was duped. I feel bad about it because I know him. He’s a good guy with real degrees (so please don’t equate him with charlatans like Ron Wyatt). Yeah, he should have known better. But at least he’s being honest here.

comments:
Until Randall’s accusations are proven true, they seem to be to have been born of financially-based resentment and racism. His account is not substantiated by any yet-known physical evidence, and contains mostly third- and four-hand rumors. His animosity toward the Chinese-Turkish team can be said to have been inspired by jealousy. Whether mainstream scientists recognize him as one of their own or not, he is still susceptible to the universal drive to be the first to discover things of significance.

Im not sure why Ron Wyatt is a Charlitan but he has presented a lot of good evidence including the giant counter balancing weights all over the nearby land. I see this a case of the luciferian ptb, meant to be debunked disinfo to discredit what may well be the very site of the Ark.

You may be drawing a conclusion too soon. The language of Price is “reported to be” and “reputed to have been” and “are said to have planted” and “I was shown the cave”. This does not sound like first-hand information. Cobwebs on the Ark when it landed had to have been thick on the walls and ceilings. While the planet’s temperature became more seasonal over time – including colder – spiders and other insects remaining on the Ark would die, but in sealed compartments where even oxygen may be in short supply, cobwebs should have little trouble staying intact for over 4000 years. What if the cave is known to some locals and accessed as well? What if there have been timbers planted? How does that lessen the idea that the Chinese may have entered hidden chambers of wood on the site? Aren’t base camps around this mountain accessed by theists and atheists alike? How do you know that Parasut was not paid off to circulate the story about the photos originating in wrecks at the Black Sea?

given the amount of wood on footage, and given that supposedly a truck
was needed to transport it (to the base of the mountain?), how was that wood supposedly transported to more than 4000m altitude in severe weather conditions on a mountain?

It all does not sound very convincing, does it?


For everyone’s information, even if the spiders wherealready in the ark when the ark landed- and im sure there were, along with spiderwebs and they could have stayed intact for 5 thousand years – yes. or they are cobwebs from spiders right there in that area. spiders have been found at 22000 feet on everest(look it up if you dont believe me) – so in the summertime spiders could have gotten in there easily!!!!! – one more thing – those cobwebs are in tact from that structure the way it stands now. the wood was supposedly taken up there in seperate pieces – so how could a fully intact cobweb be intact as the structure stands now – meaning they would have had to take that whole side or wall in one piece to keep that cobweb intact. sorry folks but i have completely blown your cobweb theory out of the water. spiders live at 13000 feet and higher and because randall price says something doesnt mean its so – whats his motive , money, spiritual belief/bias, geo political, whatever man i dont know – but figure the stuff out for yourself – i did!

we are left with a team of explorers who say they have entered chambers made of ancient wood at 4000 meters up Mt. Ararat. If that claim is in any way substantiated by first-hand scientific scrutiny, we will have just felt the earth move.

Sixty thousand or one hundred thousand Euros (as I recalled the figure) seems to be too little money to con for all the troubles that went into setting up the hoax.

Besides, I don’t think the team Hong Kong is audacious enough to claim to have entered a structure at the altitude claimed while it wasn’t so. Remember it was not only a couple of people who went in.

I suspect it is because of the perceived animosity towards Islam that could be found on the website(s) of Dr Price’s ministries that led to the Turks’ reluctance to work with him. There is also a little bit of politics involved, probably. The Turkish government probably did not want any Americans to claim having found the ark first.

Questions: Is the artifact in a glacier, or is it buried in stable ice? If a glacier then it is less likely to be the Ark, because even at glacial speed, it would have moved down the mountain by now. However, if it is buried under stable ice then it has potential. I don’t think the word ‘glacier’ is on the Nami web site.
What about the modern-appearing rope in the video? Is it conceivable that antediluvians had rope that looked so much like today’s?
Good point about analyzing the pottery on the shelf in the video. If from the Ark there should be no historical correlate.
Any more comment on the odd (rough) wall construction in space number 7? KD, how could it be leather? Unless you are asserting out right fraud, I doubt it is taken from outside the site.
Overall, sub zero temperatures and being buried by ice is a plausible scenario for preserving an artifact indefinitely.
As to the water going down in 40 days, Henry Morris argued the biblical text asserts 150 days of ‘assuaging’, and a total of almost exactly a year for the whole time of the flood.
If it is the Ark, the geology textbooks (just for starters) must be largely junked, at least as far as their interpretation of time and sedimentary rock formation.
Biblically, most of the water for the flood apparently came from within the crust, having been placed there at creation, God knowing he would ‘need’ it later for the flood. In the flood account the first thing that happened was not rain fall: it was the breaking up of all the fountains of the great deep. This is a geologically plausible scenario, as the violent scrambling/grinding of the rocks would produce huge volumes of sediment, which gradually settled out in to layers containing the drowned biota, making what is now the fossiliferous sedimentary rock layers that are the most common rock on the surface of the earth. Just what you’d expect if Noah’s flood really happened.

Ridiculous comments, the timbers are obviously to huge to get 4000 feet above sea level. A truck drove the timbers up. Come on, use your heads! There is no way those timbers were recently deposited on that mountain. It may or may not be the ark but the comments are nothing but rumor.

https://web.archive.org/web/20101218172247/http://www.worldofthebible.com/news.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20100503061548/http://ezekielcountdown.wordpress.com/2010/04/28/randall-price-ark-pictures-are-fake/

==============================================================================================================================
Arche Noah – »Made in China«

http://www.bibelabenteurer.de/html/120927_arche_made_in_china.html?fbclid=IwAR2MzcJWpPW9G04hZatktiUAYIMZ0DTQjg1tzNiCShVCneiHhuxh_AaSVtI

Warum wurde die C-14-Datierung ausgerechnet im Iran vorgenommen?
Warum waren Filmemacher anstatt Wissenschaftler im Entdeckerteam?
Lassen die geologischen Bedingungen am Fundort – der übrigens vorerst geheimgehalten wird – die jahrtausendelange Konservierung der Arche Noah zu?
Sind Stroh, Spinnweben und Spuren von Holzwürmern, die auf den Fotos zu erkennen sind, am Fundort denkbar?
Wurden die Fotos tatsächlich an der angegebenen Stelle aufgenommen?
Welche Motivation hatten die Teammitglieder?

My reply:

das sind alles gerechtfertigte Fragen, die auch rechtfertigen, zweifel aufkommen lassen. Das sind auch die zum teil guten gründe, warum die Echtheit dieser Arche in frage gestellt wurde, und als Resultat, die Entdeckung bis heute größtenteils ignoriert worden ist. Auch bei mir war das Thema abgehakt, als die ganze Geschichten in 2010 aufkam, und dann, nicht sehr lange nachher die Meldung, dass lokale Leute den Fundort inszeniert hatten.

Doch als ich meine Facebook newsfeed las, und Greg Thurson einen Austausch mit Philip Williams re-postete, ließ mich aufhorchen, dass Philip den Fundort auf Mount Ararat persönlich besucht hatte. Da er gerade zugegen war, begann ich ihm fragen zu stellen, und er gab mir auch einen Link, wo er seine Reise dokumentierte, und was er am Ort sah. Da er einen wissenschaftlichen Hintergrund hat, auf die Arche Noah stoß, als er antike Migrationen von Ureinwohnern studierte, war seine angehensweise wissenschaftlich geprägt.

So war ich motiviert, der Sache auf den Grund zu gehen. Und es wurde mir sehr schnell klar, dass sich da damals eine Seifenoper abspielte, wo Ego, Vorurteile, Ersucht, und Geld eine Rolle mit im Spiel hatten. Auf der einen Seite Randall Price, und Don Patton, und auf der anderen Parasut, und das chinesische Team. Die Amerikaner hatten das nachsehen, und begannen eine Schmierkampagne, welche zum Resultat hatte, dass der Fund erfolgreich als hoax abgestempelt wurde.

Zeit ist jedoch ein gutes Mittel, um die Wahrheit hervorkommen zu lassen. Ich habe mit Philip fast zwei Stunden am Telefon gesprochen. Er hat mit ein klares Bild geschildert, und verschiedene Fragen beantwortet. Er kennt Parasut ( ist sein Freund ), kennt die Familie, die den Zugang zu Mount Ararat seit Jahrhunderten kontrolliert, und hat mir gesagt, dass er daran ist, ein Team von Wissenschaftlern zusammenzustellen, um die Überreste wissenschaftlich zu untersuchen.

Bei mir hat es klick gemacht, als mir klarwurde, dass die fragen, die du gestellt hast, wichtig, aber nicht primär sind. Philips Video beweist, der Fundort existiert, ist real, und bestätigt was die Chinesen gefilmt haben. Nur die Kammer mit dem Stroh, könnte theoretisch sein, dass sie anderswo gefilmt wurde. Das werde ich mit Philip abklären. Aber bei kurzer Analyse wird es klar, dass die Geschichte des Film-sets von Don Patton frei erfunden worden ist. Er hat KEINE Beweise geliefert, wie Fotos während dem Bau des Sets, noch sonstwas. Nur leere Behauptungen. Warum hat fast niemand genauso kritisch seine Behauptungen unter die Lupe genommen ? Ich denke, weil es einem leicht fallt, das unglaubliche nicht zu glauben. Bei mir wars auch so. Zu fantastisch. Zu sensationell. Zu unvorstellbar dass die Arche noch existiert. Kann nicht wahr sein. So, stelle ich mir vor, dachten die meisten.

Alle fragen, die du gestellt hast, sollten von qualifizierten Wissenschaftlern aufgeklärt werden. Ich jedoch bin mir vorherab sicher, dass es sich nicht um einen hoax handelt. So einen Ort künstlich herzustellen, würde einen unglaublichen Aufwand erfordern, vor allem finanziell, aber auch logistisch. Die Story, die Don da aufgetischt hat, ist nicht mehr als das. Eine story. Die er erfunden hat.

Mir genügt was ich jetzt weiß, den Fund in meine Apologetics toolbox aufzunehmen. Andere mögen warten, bis ein wissenschaftliches Team antworten bringt. Eines ist offensichtlich. Das Puzzle der Wahrhaftigkeit der Bibel schließt sich immer mehr.

Roemerbrief 3.4: Es bleibe vielmehr so: Gott ist wahrhaftig, und alle Menschen sind Lügner; wie geschrieben steht (Psalm 51,6): »Damit du recht behältst in deinen Worten und siegst, wenn man mit dir rechtet.«

Is Noah’s Ark on Mount Ararat?
https://answersingenesis.org/noahs-ark/noahs-ark-found/noahs-ark-mount-ararat/


=============================================================================================================================================

https://noahsfloodnoahsark.wordpress.com/category/chapter-09-denial-of-findings-nami/
Todd C. Wood, a baraminologist (creationist who knows better than to reject evolution outright) at William Jennings Bryan College in Dayton, TN, rejected the finding, observing:

“1. They claim that radiocarbon dates the wood to 4800 years before present, but the Ark was constructed of pre-Flood wood, which would mean that the carbon dating should be much, much older.

2. The modern “Mt. Ararat” (Agri Dagh) is a post-Flood volcano. The Ark could not have landed on Agri Dagh because it did not exist at the end of the Flood, and even if it did land on modern Agri Dagh, it would have been destroyed by the many, many eruptions of Ararat since the Flood. You can observe all the fresh lava flows on Agri Dagh at Google Maps.

3. Given that the Flood survivors left the Ark to find a devastated world, the Ark would have been the best source of timber for the first decade or so. I think it highly likely that the Ark was dismantled to supply the growing population with building material for shelter.”

2012-05-28 派斯博士（Dr. Randall Price）專訪第一節 Interview with Dr.Randall Price Part 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYlIXWBVWCg&feature=youtu.be


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3pVdKSCWWA&t=6s




Noah's Ark Ministries International (NAMI), mostly a Chinese team, did make an expedition to Mount Ararat back in 2009 and reached the remains of a large wooden structure at a 12,000-ft. elevation ( 4100 mts ) and dated it as 4,800 years old, claiming that it was with high certainty Noah’s Ark.  When I took notice, it filled me with joy, but soon the claim was questioned, and after a short investigation, I concluded like most apologetic ministries, that the site was staged, and the whole story a hoax. The key claim that made me dismiss the story  was that :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Searches_for_Noah%27s_Ark
" The discovery was probably the result of a hoax, perpetrated by ten Kurdish workers hired by the Turkish guide used by the Chinese, who planted large wood beams taken from an old structure near the Black Sea at the cave site "

For me, this was sad. It seemed almost too good to be true. This would be the most amazing archaeological discovery, and enormously back up the biblical story of Noah's flood, and give credence to the biblical account in genesis. The issue was settled.

Recently, I stumbled on a Facebook post of  Greg Thurston about Philip Williams, which was interacting at the comments section, and informed that he did visit the site at Mount Ararat, in Turkey, in 2014. Immediately that drew my attention since I never had the chance to talk directly to someone that actually visited the site. So he did send me a link of a video of his expedition:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQDmBA9TuD0


The site was first discovered by a Kurdish local with the nickname Parasut.  His real name is Mr. Ahmet Ertuğrul:
https://www.facebook.com/ahmet.ertugrul.39

Don Patton gave a detailed narrative of why he considered the archeological site a hoax:
https://web.archive.org/web/20170621214113/http://www.worldofthebible.com/Documents/Fall2010.pdf

an accusation, that was supported by Creation.com ministry:
The ‘Hong Kong ark’ fiasco
https://creation.com/hong-kong-ark-fiasco?fbclid=IwAR21H33Qy38tN_bmqIyKN39tiNHB8_sMH0NijkmHxXTEEoc1ZUOi48A7l-A

and ICR: Noah’s Ark ‘Discovery’ Likely a Sinking Ship
https://www.icr.org/article/noahs-ark-discovery-likely-sinking

Philip Williams, convinced that the discovery is not a hoax, did respond to the accusations of Don Patton and Randall Price:

A Response to Randall Price
http://arkapology.com/a-response-to-randal-price/?fbclid=IwAR14UCgQz4jViDlsig598Ta_XqbheoUfEfulIp4taKyLte20Y0rLjZWkkX4

After reading and listening to both sides, Don Patton's version does not seem credible to me.  The opposing sides provided several points in order to back up their conclusions. But none has the weight as this one, which is in my view the key point:

The major claim that someone hauled huge wooden structures up the mountain during the offseason (non-summertime), and set them into a glacial crevasse is ridiculous at best.
All that wood could not have been hauled way up there and assembled to look like the wreckage of a vessel, then covered with glacier and volcanic rock.
https://dancingfromgenesis.wordpress.com/2010/05/18/background-real-name-turkish-guide-parasut-ahmet-ertugrul-noahs-ark-discoverer-mount-ararat-turkish-mountain-exploration-first-time-discovered-nami-documented-wooden-wreckage-noahs-ark-climb-2008/

I agree. Nobody would be able to construct a place of that huge size at over 4000mts altitude, almost without oxygen, and very low temperatures, for four years, with just a small team of four to nine people, two weeks per year, during the summertime. There are some huge wooden walls, up to 5 mts high and 12 mts wide, and hundreds of large wooden planks, all with different cuts and sizes, and wooden nails. The NAMI team reported 7 distinct rooms, some very large. Sorry, but no forger would be able to construct such a site. Even worse, they claim that Parasut did supervise the construction from distance by cell phone !! That's nothing short than ridiculous...

I am open to being convinced that Don Patton's narrative is true but only based on HARD EVIDENCE, not hearsay, anonymous " witnesses", storytelling, and so forth. To me, it seems that Don Patton's motivation is to be able to keep rising funds, and continuing to make expeditions to Mount Ararat. Obviously, he is not happy that he was denied to keep participating at the NAMI expedition for reasons that he details in his report.

This is the movie about the expedition:

The Days of Noah 2 - Apocalypse 




Here one of the critiques of the movie, at amazon.com:
https://www.amazon.com/Days-Noah-Apocalypse-YEUNG-Wing-cheung/dp/B00I0HCEN6

Content. Content. Content. If this isn't a video of the discovery of Noah's actual ark, then Neil Armstrong didn't land on the moon either (a point well made by Professor Melkonyon toward the end of the video)! You will have to suspend rational belief to conclude anything other than that some very brave Turkish and Hong Kong explorers have brought you conclusive evidence for the presence of a huge wooden barge, locked in 30 feet of glacial ice and volcanic rock at 14,000 feet on Mount Ararat. Deductive reasoning let's a rational thinker go only one place that I can think of with this evidence. That is, unless that person is impervious to rational thought as the result of completely unmerited bias against the Genesis account of origins and the global Flood. That person will continue to live in his Darwinian, uniformitarian fantasy.
For any free thinker out there, however, get ready for an eye-popping adventure that will have you on the edge of your seat! The sheer volume of hard evidence presented in this video is mind-boggling! The southern Mount Ararat location of sections of the ark is revealed. The 2008 expedition by Panda Lee who followed up on the heroic Parasut and his Turkish team's initial finds is fully documented. The 2009 expedition is shown in all its jarring splendor from frightening rock slides to Raiders of the Lost Ark style stumbling into huge ice-sealed wooden compartments. Stairways lead to mysterious doors. The camera movements do at times become a little dizzying as the brave cameraman slips and trips, also risking life and limb to bring us this incredible footage.
Yes Virginia, there is a God. He created the world and then destroyed it in a global flood because of the obdurate sinfulness of mankind. As Jesus predicted, final judgment of fallen mankind would be accompanied by the same studied indifference of God and His moral authority as exhibited in "the days of Noah". With the reemergence of national Israel in 1948, many of us see that predicted: "Great Tribulation" as arriving before "this (our present) generation passes away" (see the Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24-25).
This video also inadvertently reveals a scandal of epic proportions. That evangelical scholars like Randall Price and Ken Ham dismiss this find out of hand without any hard evidence, without making the slightest effort in time or money to verify or discount this find, speaks volumes about what evangelical Christianity has become. It is about maintaining personal followings and with that, financial success for their own "ministries". Competitors must be ignored or slandered. For men like these, it is apparently not really about the gospel and not about the truth. If it were, how could these men and "ministries" such as theirs resist following up on this find that underscores the veracity of the Scriptures more than any archaeological find in history?
Well, I have personally met Yeung Wing-cheung, the producer, Panda Lee the 2008 climber, and Clara Wei, one of NAMI's researchers. They are completely reliable witnesses, determined only to reveal the truth about this find. This video should do the job in spades for any unbiased truth-seeker.
Michael S. Neutzling, author of "The 144,000, The New Maccabees Are Coming"



The NAMI - Chinese expedition



Finders of the lost ark
In a new documentary, Hong Kong explorers tell how they uncovered Noah's vessel
https://www.scmp.com/yp/discover/entertainment/movies/article/3061329/finders-lost-ark
Barry C Chung | 13:10pm, 12 Oct, 2011

Andrew Yuen of The Media Evangelism Ltd says he is convinced that what they found on Mount Ararat was the biblical Noah's ark.Andrew Yuen of The Media Evangelism Ltd says he is convinced that what they found on Mount Ararat was the biblical Noah's ark.
Depending on whom you ask, it's either the most amazing find in history - or a massive practical joke. On one side is Noah's Ark Ministries International (Nami), who have claimed, on several occasions, to have found remnants of the biblical Noah's ark. On the other - this group is a lot larger - are sceptics who think the discovery is nothing more than a big hoax.
A Hong Kong-Turkish team from Nami made headlines in May last year when they claimed they had discovered Noah's ark. The team videotaped their expedition.

Now, almost a year and a half later, they have released their findings in the documentary The Days of Noah 2 - Apocalypse.

In August 2006, professional mountain climber Ahmet Ertugrul, also known as Parasut, claimed he had found a wooden structure 4,000 metres above sea level on Mount Ararat in Turkey.

The University of Hong Kong's department of earth sciences examined wood samples from the structure and confirmed they were petrified wood - wood that has turned into stone over hundreds of years.

In September 2008, Parasut made his way to the ark once again and came back with a collection of photos.

"In 2008, we received photos from the Kurdish [Parasut]," says Andrew Yuen Man-fai, general secretary of Christian media group The Media Evangelism Ltd and a member of the Hong Kong ark search team.

"We had no idea about this site that they found. They said it was a dangerous location and very difficult to get to. We wanted someone from our camp to see it first."

The team sent climbing expert Panda Lee Yiu-fai to take a look. He came back with more photos and video images of the supposed ark.

In October 2009, a team of 15 people, including six from Nami in Hong Kong, made their way to the snow-capped cave. During their journey, they had to cope with difficult terrain and stormy weather.

Eventually they reached their destination, guided, Yuen says, by the "invisible hand" of God.

Their journey, along with footage filmed inside the ark, makes up about two-thirds of The Days of Noah 2. The rest of the film includes history, re-enactments and a presentation about the end of the world. The team found seven spaces inside the wooden structure.

"There were certain details, craftsmanship that hinted it was the ark," Yuen says. "Instead of nails, the wood is connected very much like a jigsaw puzzle. It is placed together, and once it encounters water, it will expand and be secured tightly together."

Their claim to have found the ark came under intense scrutiny. Strong criticism came from theologian and archaeologist Randall Price, who claims that a team, led by Parasut, built the site out of materials from the city of Trabzon near the Black Sea. In a document more than 50 pages long, Price attacks Nami's claims.

His report accepts that the team did find a wooden structure on Mount Ararat but says it was constructed by workers employed by Parasut. He concludes that Nami may have been a victim of Parasut's hoax.

"We didn't find anything that was not real," Yuen says. "If we did, we would have ended the expedition. If one was to make a set of this magnitude, by digging through ice and land, the money needed to do that would be more than the actual expedition cost."

The Days of Noah, a film released in 2005, reported on Nami's earlier attempts this century to find the ark. Yuen says they found it, but a "mysterious force" caused their cameras to malfunction.

That site has since been destroyed by earthquakes. According to the new film, over the years, natural events caused the ark to split into three sections.



This website concerns the June 2008 discovery of the large wooden structure on mount Ararat in eastern Turkey and the 2010 press release about this discovery.
http://www.arkinsight.nl/press-photos-2/

Special Report - Scientists and Researchers From Hong Kong And Turkey Claim To Have Found Remnants Of Noah's Ark
Jan 22, 2008
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r1Q1lDNwRU


Exclusive - Infolive.tv Speaks With Turkish Explorer Who Cla
Jan 27, 2008
A team of scientists from Hong Kong and Turkey believe they have discovered the remains ofNoah's Ark on Mount Ararat in Turkey. After many years of searching,  in the summer of 2007, the fourth expedition yielded results. Turkish mountaineering expert and explorer Mr. Ahmet Ertugrul came upon a cave at an altitude of over 4200 meters and inside  found parts of a wooden structure. Samples were sent to Hong Kong University and the results clarified the findings were part of a petrified wooden structure In an exclusive interview with Infolive.tv, Mr. Ertugrul talks abotu the discovery and plans to search two other sites on the mountain where he believes there are other remains of Noah's Ark. Noah'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axTGmWoGEOQ


An Exclusive Interview with Noah's Ark Search Team Leader Mr. Parasut
May 19, 2010
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcrQx0ptntM




Noahs Ark found in Turkey Breaking News from HK Expedition Team 4
May 6, 2010
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dl7tnOuFb4c


Noahs Ark found in Turkey 7 Spaces were Discovered 探索隊新考據，七度空間曝光
May 6, 2010
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgziO6jc-3Y



Noah’s Ark discovery team interview - NAMI
https://vimeo.com/144645704



https://www.90min.com/posts/6296514-greatest-stories?noads&art-id=1JgAv2OuoDusagLt8nUjJF&fpCode=&page=20
http://www.ancientpages.com/2014/05/04/search-noahs-ark-continues-inside-mount-ararat-research-project/
https://lostworldmuseum.com/2008/02/noahs-ark-remains-found-by-the-chinese/

Noah’s Ark discovered? Researchers '99.9 per cent certain' of astonishing Biblical find
SCIENTISTS may have discovered the remains of Noah’s Ark in what could be the biggest Biblical archaeological discovery of all time.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/806755/Noah-s-Ark-discovered-Bible-archaeology

Answers to the claim that the site is a fraud:

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t2940-noah-s-ark-has-been-found-with-high-probability-on-mount-ararat#7429

Questions for those that advocate, that the structure is a hoax or that it was build in more recent times, a film-set staged, must answer providing good reasons and arguments to support such claims. 

Abductive reasoning is the right approach in regards to historical sciences. People that think the site is not Noah's ark, have as well the burden of proof, to refute the site beyond a reasonable doubt, by providing BETTER alternative explanations of what the construction is, and how it got up there to a height of 13800 ft. ( 4100 mts ) I have not seen any of the claimers that the structure is a film-set proving their assertions. Empirical proofs, like photos, videos of the camp near the entrance, the wood being prepared and being brought up to the mountain, pitch being applied to the wooden wall, that would count as empirical evidence to substantiate a hoax-claim. Hearsay, letters that can be the product of forgers, personal attacks, empty accusations are not evidence.  


Navarra did probably find remains of Noah's Ark back in 1955. He did film the removal of wood from the site. The hoax hypothesis would be confirmed, and the burden of proof met if the claimants would be able to provide footage and pictures of the construction camp, wood outside the entrance, being stocked, and prepared to be moved entering the building site. Something like Navarra's footage, where he removes wood from the site. The movie demonstrates the difficulty to move just one wooden trunk. 
The Quest for Noah's Ark ∞ History ∞ Part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMs0zRI79pQ


1. How could such a structure have been constructed at 15,000 feet in the permanent snow cap? I have snapshots of each wood plank with different cuts. I did count just in the site which Philip Williams visited, over 150 planks of different sizes and cuts. Panda lee reported one plank, in his expedition in 2008, to be 20 meters long. Dispersed and buried in ice deep below the surface. In the access tunnels and wood chambers, there are massive stairs made of wood trunks, each at least with a weight of over 200 lbs, buried in ice. There are huge wood walls impregnated with pitch, and curved, like a boat hull. How was all this constructed up there?  

2. How could it have been buried so deep?. Under 20-30 feet of frozen volcanic rock and ice? Sub-freezing temperatures make it virtually impossible to construct a large ship under those conditions.

3. How could it have been made, considering that it is too unstable and dangerous in its location? One site leans precariously on a ledge, another on the side of a glacier slowing moving down the mountain. Large rocks regularly tumble the mountain burying the structure and threatening the life of workers.

4. It is a huge structure. It is in at least two pieces which together appear to be about the size of Noah’s Ark (450 feet long). How could it have been made, dragging that much timber that high, fabricating and assembling all the intricate wooden joints ? is it not too much for this height and temperature?

5. It is too complicated. It has a bowed hull, three decks, numerous square deep wooden joints for square wooden nails, tongue and grooved joined boards with evidence of handcraft: Would it not be too intricate and complex to construct under such difficult conditions?

6. It contains pottery, food remains skeletons of animals and various artifacts of ancient age.

7. If it is of recent construction, why is there surface patina on it which does not exist on recently fabricated boards, and there is no known way to fabricate it?

8. Noah and his family worked on level ground for perhaps 120 years. How could someone build this big ship on a high mountain under these seemingly impossible conditions in the few weeks per year after meltwater stops flowing and before winter snow prevents access to the sites?

9. How could the structure be of recent construction, in snow and ice, how would the spider webs there have come about? Did the hoaxsters place the web there by hand? Really? Wow! I would sure like to see how that was done. Or, are we to believe that a spider living near the construction site climbed into the recesses of the structure soon after the workers left the area and built a web and an old looking web at that? Both of these ideas are fanciful at best! The web itself shows that either the spider web was there from the beginning and has been preserved in a state of deep freeze or it was made long before recent times and the structure has remained undisturbed for many years. Neither option fits the current hoax theory.  I still see no problem of spiders in such high altitudes:
Zoogeography of Arachnida 2018, page 866
Concerning the mountains of Eurasia, the high-altitude spiders are relatively well-known (Pyrenees, Alps, Pirin, and other Bulgarian mountains, Caucasus, and the Himalayas). As a model for comparison, we use the most numerous and varied family in all high mountains – Linyphiidae (Erigoninae included). Over 2200 m in separate mountain systems, the following genera and species of Linyphiidae are represented: Pyrenees – 39 genera, 65 species
Alps – 44 genera, 101 species Rila – Pirin – Vitosha – Stara planina – 30 genera, 55 species Caucasus – 51 genera, 84 species Himalayas – 21 genera, 52 species

10. How can advocates that claim the site is a Hoax based on articles like Answers in Genesis be so sure that the radiocarbon dating done so far is accurate when we know otherwise? Inaccuracies in radiocarbon dating
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/06/180605112057.htm
June 5, 2018
Cornell University

Radiocarbon dating is a key tool archaeologists use to determine the age of plants and objects made with organic material. But new research shows that commonly accepted radiocarbon dating standards can miss the mark -- calling into question historical timelines.












Archaeologist Answers Why Prehistoric Sites Associated with Noah's Ark on Mount Ararat Were Recently Discovered
Randall Price, Richard Bright, and Don Patton. These individuals opposed the discovery for a montage of reasons: tribal rivalry, hysteria, ignorance, emotion, lack of discernment, bias, and mostly because they profited from bogus Noah’s Ark searches.
http://www.releasewire.com/press-releases/archaeologist-answers-why-prehistoric-sites-associated-with-noahs-ark-on-mount-ararat-were-recently-discovered-196034.htm

A Response to Randall Price
http://arkapology.com/a-response-to-randal-price/?fbclid=IwAR14UCgQz4jViDlsig598Ta_XqbheoUfEfulIp4taKyLte20Y0rLjZWkkX4

Archaeologist Counters Critics Mount Ararat Discovery Is a Prehistoric Site
Concerning Price’s allegation that Parasut and a small team built the structure on Mount Ararat, Klenck states, “That claim is incorrect.” He states, “The site is large, perhaps over one-hundred meters in length, at least two floors deep, and buried under as much as fifteen meters of stones and ice.” Klenck continues, “Parasut and his team did not build the features instead they removed ice and stones from previously excavated passages formed as late as the Bronze Age, as evidenced by a small bowl from this period, to access the site.”

Carl Wieland, from Creation Ministries International, reported that straight, cross-grain marks on wood planks, appearing in several photographs from the Ararat site, were produced by a modern industrial planer. Klenck responds, “These same marks are found on other wood features in antiquity, particularly maritime constructions such as the Binissafuller from the sixth century A.D. in Minorca; the Fiumicino from the fifth century A.D. in Rome; the Kyrenia from the fourth century B.C.; and planks from the sixth century B.C. vessel found at Pabuç Burnu in Turkey. These marks are caused by stone and later metal adzes and other tools used to create smooth surfaces and the construction of futtocks or cross timbers. The wood planks at the Ararat site are most certainly of ancient construction.”
http://www.sbwire.com/press-releases/release-119735.htm

dpatton693@aol.com

The claim that Parasut forged and set up a " Movie Set" makes no sense whatsoever

Let us suppose that the wooden structure found on Mount Ararat by the NAMI team were the product of a Movie-Set, as claimed by Don Patton at page 33 of his report:

https://www.bible.ca/ark/NAMI-noahs-ark-discovered-found-made-in-china-fraud/NAMI-noahs-ark-discovered-dr-don-patton-randall-price-made-in-china-fraud-20-nov-2010.htm

https://web.archive.org/web/20170621214113/http://www.worldofthebible.com/Documents/Fall2010.pdf

And let us suppose that Parasut did set-up an intentional deception. First of all, leading the venture to build the site, he would have supervised the construction personally. But let us suppose that this was not the case as claimed by Don.

Claim:
Paraşüt himself never actually went to the site, but continually asked them for details to be sure everything was looking good. 

Reply:
In order to know that he got the product and that the hired workers were faithfully doing their job, he would have demanded AT LEAST some documentation, pictures of the ongoing construction. Why has none of the supposed employees provided ANY pictures of the make of the site? 

Claim:
Question: "From where did they bring the wood?"
Answer:  "I'm not sure, but I heard they brought it from the Black Sea."

Reply: 
Parasut would have had to go to the black sea to find the wood, organize the transport to the Mountain. That would not only have been a venture requiring considerable logistics and time, but also an enormous amount of money and involved many people, suppliers, transport companies to transport the wood first to a place at the closest city, Doğubeyazıt. That is a distance of almost 500 km. Then store the wood at a reliable place.  



Claim: 
The wood was carried by large trucks to 2,500 meters and then by horses to 3,700 meters. Then each worker carried two pieces of wood until all of it was at the site. 

Reply: 
That is a task of high difficulty and complexity, in special, not existing any roads to climb uphill arriving near the site. The horses would not be able to arrive nearby, the last step would by people carrying up to 10 or 20 mts big wood planks on their shoulders to the site.

As Philip replies: 
The time of yearly construction that the authors unidentified source mentions has somehow expanded from 2 weeks mentioned previously to one month here. Perhaps the extra 2 weeks are seen here as needed for hauling and carrying the timbers. That is going to be a lot of traffic on the Federation Trail. Even if the government didn’t know, surely many in Ararat Village and Elli Nomad Village as well as Dogubayazit did notice all those large trucks and horses headed up and down the mountain. The authors’ Ark Search LLC use these same porters and horses. It is very difficult to operate at 4,000 plus meters. Surely Parasut would have thought of processing the wood to make it look old before carrying it to the site. But wasn’t he suppose to have brought old wood to the site! In any case, rubbed ash isn’t going to adhere to the wood like tar pitch or a coat of paint. In truth, no amount of onsite processing is going to make the wood look old, or obtain the appearance of the wood shown in NAMI’s photos. (See below.) The numerous tons of rocks that would need to be removed would be piled up and would surely be falling on the structure. But due to the now buried built structure, the exterior should still have a very large pile of leftover rocks. Anyone, including Price and Patton should easily find Parasut’s site.




The last step is the most unlikely one claimed to have occurred by Don Patton:

http://arkapology.com/a-response-to-randal-price/?fbclid=IwAR14UCgQz4jViDlsig598Ta_XqbheoUfEfulIp4taKyLte20Y0rLjZWkkX4
Know that the authors are themselves involved with a rival project on the summit of Mount Ararat that does involve melting or removing snow whether with fire and gas I don’t know. Though extremely dangerous, what the authors’ team are doing at their rival project on the summit and what is proposed here is not so difficult. But what would be incredibly challenging is removing the many tons of frozen volcanic rock overlying the buried site that NAMI shows in their videos. From my own experience, I know that merely visiting this site is trepidatious. But it is the melting of the ice that loosens the rocks that makes it so very dangerous even when one is not deliberately melting the ice. Carrying large timbers to these heights and transporting them by hand across a dangerous canyon would be most challenging, but the dangers and difficulties of that would be nothing like digging into the frozen ground to remove these very large but unstable rocks. Due to the special needs of operating at these heights that would require a far larger operation than the authors propose here. Another danger are the large rocks that regularly tumble down the mountain, which the authors themselves experienced in their attempt to visit what they believe to be the site.


Don Patton's Alleged Credentials
Since early 1989, Don Patton, a close associate of Carl Baugh and leader of Metroplex Institute of Origins Science (MIOS) near Dallas, has claimed a Ph.D. (or "Ph.D. candidacy") in geology from Queensland Christian University in Australia. However, QCU is another unaccredited school linked to Clifford Wilson. [34] When questioned about this at a recent MIOS meeting, Patton indicated that he was aware of some problems relating to QCU, and was withdrawing his Ph.D. candidacy.

However, the printed abstracts of the 1989 Bible-Science conference in Dayton, Tennessee (where Patton gave two talks) stated that he was a Ph.D. candidacy in geology, and implied that he has at least four degrees from three separate schools. When I asked Patton for clarification on this during the conference, he stated that he had no degrees, but was about to receive a Ph.D. degree in geology, pending accreditation of QCU, which he assured me was "three days away." Many days have since passed, and Patton still has no valid degree in geology. Nor is the accreditation of QCU imminent. Australian researcher Ian Plimer reported, "PCI, QPU, PCT, and PCGS have no formal curriculum, no classes, no research facilities, no calendar, no campus, and no academic staff....Any Ph.D. or Ph.D. candidacy at QPU by Patton is fraudulent."

With surprising boldness, Carl Baugh recently appeared on a radio talk show in Texas claiming the same degrees discussed above, plus a new "Ph.D. candidacy in paleoanthropology from Pacific College." Baugh complained that critics were now attacking his credentials and those of other fine creationists, including "Dr. Don Patton."
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy/degrees.html


Many objections have been brought forward to justify the rejection of the Ark found by the NAMI team. From Radio C14 tests to claiming that  Mount Ararat is not the site where Noah's Ark landed. The foremost evidence in this case in favor is visual. The pictures and videos made at the site by various expeditions. The wooden trunk staircases, the various compartments, how old the wood looks, the remains of food, and pottery. The structures are buried deep inside the mountains of rocks and Ice. The difficulty to reach the site as well, at over 4100 mts of altitude. If someone wishes to refute it as the true landing site, it has to provide evidence either that a) it was an old farmhouse made by locals, or b) a film-set, made as a stage to fool visitors, and get tourism attraction. All other objections, like claiming that C14 radiocarbon tests to not give the right age of the wood, claiming that geological investigations demonstrate that the ark had to land somewhere else, to claim that the people involved are not credible, claiming that the survivors would have used all wood to build the first agglomeration etc. do not suffice, nor do have the same weight, to reject the finding. The locals that control the access to the place know the structure for almost 200 years. The ones that claim that the place is a forgery, a film-set constructed to dupe visitors, have yet to provide hard verifiable evidence, like pictures of the construction, in order to be taken seriously. I have yet to see that evidence to change my mind.

One thing that we all hate, is to believe, endorse, and defend a claim, and afterward being proven wrong, being exposed as gullible fools, that believe any claim without scrutinizing it with adequate seriousness and intelligently. It's enough that we are ridiculed for no reasons by unbelievers which have always been the majority, on positions that we hold based on VERY solid evidence. Do you think, I have not been concerned, to embrace Noahs Ark filmed by the NAMI team, to post at my timeline that I am convinced after only one day of investigation, that the evidence is credible? This concern has vanished. Back in 2010, I did not do an in-depth investigation as now. One reason is that, after I did read that it was a film set, a site staged by locals to attract tourism, I swallowed it easily, it was easy to think that such a discovery is too good to be true. Too incredible. Too sensational. So I left it by that. And not having empirical evidence did not change my faith that genesis was true and that the flood happened. Now, with the new information at hand, I CHALLENGE any skeptic to provide sufficient evidence in order to refute the claim that Noah's Ark has indeed been found. The pictures of the archaeological site high up in the mountain, with very difficult access, of the wooden planks deep buried under meters of volcanic rock and ice, the wooden nails, the staircases crafted in the big wood trunks, seven rooms with wood walls, some 5 mts high, if that is not hard, compelling evidence of the archaeological site, I don't know what is.  People are far too easily abstracted by secondary evidence and issues. Looking at credentials of nay-sayers etc. Storytellers claiming that the site is a film-set, I ask: where is the evidence? where are the pictures? If the denouncers do not want to say who they are, just cover the faces in the pictures where they show building the site. No denier has brought forward such evidence. Why? Because these pictures do not exist.  Perry Marshall offers 1mio dollar for who demonstrates abiogenesis to be possible. I don't go that far. But i eat my grandmother's broom if I am wrong and such pictures appear...on that, and ONLY that stands and falls THIS ark.

Claim: Spiders cannot live that high up in the mountains
Reply: 
no problem of spiders in such high altitudes:
Zoogeography of Arachnida 2018, page 866
Concerning the mountains of Eurasia, the high-altitude spiders are relatively well-known (Pyrenees, Alps, Pirin, and other Bulgarian mountains, Caucasus, and the Himalayas). As a model for comparison, we use the most numerous and varied family in all high mountains – Linyphiidae (Erigoninae included). Over 2200 m in separate mountain systems, the following genera and species of Linyphiidae are represented: Pyrenees – 39 genera, 65 species
Alps – 44 genera, 101 species Rila – Pirin – Vitosha – Stara planina – 30 genera, 55 species Caucasus – 51 genera, 84 species Himalayas – 21 genera, 52 species

Archaeologist Defends Mount Ararat Discovery
The spider webbing that is always referred to as proof that the structure is a hoax actually proves it is not. If the structure was recently built at nearly 14, 000 ft. in snow and ice, how would the web have come about? Did the hoaxters place the web there by hand? Really? Wow! I would sure like to see how that was done. Or, are we to believe that a spider living near the construction site climbed into the recesses of the structure soon after the workers left the area and built a web and an old looking web at that? Both of these ideas are fanciful at best! The web itself show that either the spider web was there from the beginning and has been preserved in a state of deep freeze or it was made long before recent times and the structure has remained undisturbed for many years. Neither option fits the current hoax theory. Thus, this find should be looked at with much greater care.
https://archaeologynewsnetwork.blogspot.com/2011/12/archaeologist-defends-mount-ararat.html



Claim: Radiocarbon tests prove the site is not 5000 years old.
https://answersingenesis.org/.../response-accusations-of.../
This article is from the scientist with the team that did the Carbon 14 samples. He states : He reported, and Noah’s Ark Ministries International and The Media Evangelism have not denied the truth of what I reported, that two of their four wood samples were each tested at two radiocarbon laboratories, and both laboratories certified those wood samples were modern: post-1950 and 120–135 years old, respectively. Their third sample yielded a carbon-14 age of only 610 years.
Reply:
Inaccuracies in radiocarbon dating
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/06/180605112057.htm
June 5, 2018
Cornell University

Radiocarbon dating is a key tool archaeologists use to determine the age of plants and objects made with organic material. But new research shows that commonly accepted radiocarbon dating standards can miss the mark -- calling into question historical timelines.

Archaeologist Sturt Manning and colleagues have revealed variations in the radiocarbon cycle at certain periods of time, affecting frequently cited standards used in archaeological and historical research relevant to the southern Levant region, which includes Israel, southern Jordan and Egypt. These variations, or offsets, of up to 20 years in the calibration of precise radiocarbon dating could be related to climatic conditions.

"There has been much debate for several decades among scholars arguing for different chronologies sometimes only decades to a century apart -- each with major historical implications. And yet these studies ... may all be inaccurate since they are using the wrong radiocarbon information," Manning said.

"Our work," he added, "should prompt a round of revisions and rethinking for the timeline of the archaeology and early history of the southern Levant through the early Biblical period."

Claim: The Great Noah's Ark Hoax
https://archaeologynewsnetwork.blogspot.com/2010/04/great-noah-ark-hoax.html?fbclid=IwAR2yaZDvkttcCZw8fVWbFLzQNhCbvBSa0sobVDxt83EMq46J_YmEa1N4iq0
Some have suggested an old shepherd's hut. George Washington University professor Eric Cline "suggested it could even be a very old shepherd's hut."
Most people are probably unaware that there are "many monasteries" on Mt. Ararat, of which this "find" could be a part
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 other reasons.
Peter Ian Kuniholm, who has focused on Turkey for decades, was even more direct - saying that the reported find is a "crock."
biologist Dr. P.Z. Myers:  naturally, there is no geological evidence at all that Mt. Ararat was underwater at the time.
Cline also pointed out that the "wood should just have disintegrated" long ago. He further evinced that "it's 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."
"We know what's going on with Turkey archaeologically at that time, and there's no major interruption in the culture," Zimansky observed
"There's not enough H2O in the world to get an ark that high up a mountain," Kuniholm said.
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. However, it is possible that its builders didn't have metal nails, and this sort of construction still occurs in many parts of the world


Is all that wood on Mount Ararat really from Noah‟s Ark?
http://www.calvarypo.org/HANDS/0813.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0BzswIBgg_G44rdQEPXFE0Q8Uw36JZpLpolKL7pYNuBVL-0JV_JgKuK7c


https://www.noahsarksearch.com

John T. JohnMac McIntosh at my Facebook timeline:
It is my understanding that the left hand site is the only one being shown now where it is claimed that over many years wood has been transported to, ice over and planted. I was at the NAMI /Parasut Ark News Conference in Holland as an Ark expert in 2010. The evidence presented was not convincing or conclusive.  There is credible evidence from locals that say they helped take wood up the mountain and work on the sites. Also, Parasut and team wont allow any credible, credential scientist to examine and test the site.

I have been actively involved in the Ark research since 1976, first expedition in 1978. I know Don Patton well--a true dedicated Christian. I've been honored to have many expeditions to Ararat and know a majority of the researchers and many, many of the local people. About everything I have seen and researched about the Parasut site indicate that is a money-making and very cleverly done hoax. Samples are never allowed to be taken, folks pay BIG bucks to go to the site and are only shown limited areas of the site. If anyone can still get access to the site I wish them well. I hope a real scientific examination will be made, but NOT ALLOWED so far. Which would be expected if the site is planted and fake. I am still a consultant to some of the teams trying to do research for the Ark. I have been recently studying high-resolution satellite and drone photos of Ararat from last summer, But the Parasut site is off limits unless you want to pay big bucks( some have paid $50,000 or more) --then you are shown only a very limited area and no samples are allowed to be taken, Praying that some true, accurate, scientific documentation and testing of the site can be tested. Best wishes--John McIntosh https://www.noahsarksearch.com/The_Explorers_Of_Ararat...

Expedition of Philip Williams

https://www.facebook.com/greg.thurston.5036/posts/1657626354387168?comment_id=1666637800152690&notif_id=1588610752881749&notif_t=feedback_reaction_generic

First American Visit to the Mount Ararat Discovery
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAO_0E-J1lw



Second Deck Noah's Ark
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNxwCnfpQwE



In 40 years of apologetics, the late Norm Geisler heard every claim. His mentor was John Warwick Montgomery, the world expert on Mount Ararat. Norm never backed any claim for the Ark before this.
https://video.foxnews.com/v/4561729115001?fbclid=IwAR02NpIlKGK3G8YiroYBl_vvOiptQFbs0T-nuXGkJ6YW8uYuw6AHR1gqprk#sp=show-clips

Panda and Parasut explored the site several times before Panda got sick. An archaeologist from Holland visited just before me. Now, many years ago Ed Davis saw the site. The family in charge doesn’t allow most visits. It’s very dangerous and expensive to access. A museum is being built to protect the site.

This thing is huge, in 3 major sections. One goes from room to room. Just last year we formed the archaeological team. But they must wait until this virus thing is over. So much is required for this to happen. Just pray for the team.

Norm Geisler told Richard Land that he has spoken to 6 people who have been inside Noah’s Ark. That would be me, Parasut, Panda, Chung, Man Fai, and the Chinese actress. He didn’t ever speak to the archaeological official. But just a few more Kurds is the total number.

Does New Eyewitness Evidence Point to Noah's Ark?

Among them will be Philip Ernest Williams, who will present the results of his investigation of charges that this discovery was based on a fabrication, new video of subsequent visits to the site since the 2010 announcement, a report on his efforts to seek American scientific involvement, details of his own visit to the site last fall and the announcement of a newly formed Mount Ararat Discovery Foundation that will sponsor further investigation. Williams learned early in his career to routinely question fellow experts as he helped move the worldwide telecommunications network from the electromechanical to the digital age. Following retirement in 1990 from the software company he founded, Williams applied his hard-nosed skepticism and paradigm-questioning approach to unravel what he sees as a currently muddled view of mankind's prehistory. Understanding that grave errors in the foundations of prevailing theory give rise to unnecessarily complex and ineffective technologies, Williams suspected that the same problem might be responsible for the current situation in prehistory. He wondered how the data of prehistory might look if actually examined in the light of the early history of mankind found in the book of Genesis. Uncovering many grave errors in the foundations of current prehistory, he discovered that the account of early mankind depicted in the early chapters of Genesis precisely and far more simply explains the extra-biblical evidence.

As he was publishing his 20-year research as "The Archaeological Evidence of Noah's Flood," Williams heard about NAMI's April 2010 report about what appeared to be archaeological evidence of Noah's Ark. Though the report was immediately engulfed in controversy, Williams investigated the charges of hoax, finding them baseless. He assisted NAMI in presenting its findings to U.S. audiences and in seeking American scientific involvement with the discovery. Williams serves as director of the New Beginnings Foundation, a tiny inner-city mission in Charlotte, N.C., aimed at ecumenical cooperation with other ministries. He continues to use his system expertise to assist natives of developing nations in the development of infrastructure for their impoverished rural communities. Joining Williams will be Ahmet Ertugrul, better known to the world as Parasut, the discoverer of the wooden structure that NAMI announced to the world in 2010. Born near Mount Ararat, Parasut grew up acquainting visitors with local culture.

This famous explorer from Turkey has hosted visitors from every nation, speaks fluent Turkish, Kurdish, English and Farsi, and has a moderate proficiency in French, German and Russian. Generations of Parasut's ancestors lived in a village on Mount Ararat, and from childhood, he heard stories of visits to an ancient ship visible at certain times on the mountain but eventually becoming buried by rocks that constantly fall there. Fascinated by their accounts, Parasut trained to become a mountain climber and tourist guide. Serving as a guide for Ark Searchers, Parasut devoted himself to locating and uncovering the ancient ship that his ancestors had often visited. He came to the attention of the world in Bruce Feiler's 2001 New York Times bestseller, "Walking the Bible."
https://web.archive.org/web/20161015124305/http://araratdiscoveries.com/?page=news

https://onenewsnow.com/church/2015/10/22/engineer-tells-about-his-game-changing-discovery
Southern Evangelical Seminary in North Carolina coordinated a conference on Christian apologetics earlier this month that featured new information from several experts, including American engineer Philip Williams, chairman of the Mount Ararat Discovery Foundation.

Williams presented a video of his trip last November in which he explored the remains of a massive wooden structure that was discovered buried beneath volcanic rock and ice on Mount Ararat in Eastern Turkey five years ago.

"I climbed down through a tunnel and entered a level floor; it was an ice-covered wooden floor," he details. "There was bowed wall to my right, it was very nautical, and then to my left, there was a slanted wall that may have been a fallen floor, like something had collapsed and it was just laying scattered on the floor of the structure I saw. And then there was a level above, maybe 15-foot high."

Williams
In the engineer's opinion, this discovery is a game-changer.

"The earlier chapters of Genesis have never really been archeologically confirmed in any significant way, and it was the early chapters of Genesis in which the skepticism of the entire Bible took place," Williams references. "So if the early Genesis is confirmed, it would just really bring everything back to a biblical worldview."

Williams tells OneNewsNow it is not his job to prove the structure is Noah's Ark, but it is his job to test and provide data stating that there is nothing inconsistent with the remains being those of Noah's Ark.


http://christianleadersandscholars.com/araratwp/video-and-photographic-evidence/?fbclid=IwAR09dmHcUoKibDSjpFHkjxN_-SaUu4DTdp8mXGdryHjgiW317fZj93cv0BI







https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQDmBA9TuD0


The Archaeological Evidence of Noah's Flood
Philip Ernest Williams (Autor)

Absolutely impressive research.
Author P.E.Williams deserves much credit for the labor that has gone into this work. Whether or not one is a believer or a skeptic, Williams has taken great care to outline his sources, the distinct philosophy underlying each of several views on multiple subjects relating to the broad consideration of Earth's history. He masterfully pointed out the human propensity to hold to one's comfortable view, regardless of the evidence. One reviewer expressed that this book is more of a textbook than a quick read for the curious. It is. Still, every textbook has its genesis in somebody's curiosity, no? Years ago, a well-known psychologist praised Dr. Carl Sagan's book "The Dragons Of Eden" with particular applause for Sagan's extensive references. P.E. Williams has an extensive index of reference sources, categorized by subject, clearly revealing a researcher who hears all views weighing evidence on its merit and comparing honestly with that which is contrary. How honorable to do what we should. Thank you, Mister Williams, for exposing my mind to the knowledge! David R. Wilkerson
https://www.amazon.com.br/Archaeological-Evidence-Noahs-Flood-English-ebook/dp/B07JB5B7JX/ref=sr_1_1?__mk_pt_BR=ÅMÅŽÕÑ&keywords=The+Archaeological+Evidence+of+Noah%27s+Flood&qid=1588617839&sr=8-1


Don Patton nor Randall Price have ONE PROOF to back up their accusations.  This is the reply from Philip Williams who actually visited the site with parasut:

Is the Ark-Like Wooden Structure Found on Mt. Ararat a Hoax?
May 17, 2016  Ark Apology

http://arkapology.com/

The cumulative case of the following factors make it virtually impossible that it is a hoax.

1. It is too old. It is built from timber that has been radiocarbon and archaeologically dated to the time of Noah (3rd millennium B.C.).

2. It is too high. Part of the structure is found at 13,500 feet in the permanent snow cap, far above the treeline and too high to construct the structure that has been found there.

3. It is too deeply buried. Under 20-30 feet of frozen volcanic rock and ice. Sub-freezing temperatures make it virtually impossible to construct a large ship under those conditions.

4. It is too unstable and dangerous in its location. One site leans precariously on a ledge, another on the side of a glacier slowing moving down the mountain. Large rocks regularly tumble the mountain burying the structure and threatening the life of workers.

5. It is too big. It is in at least two pieces which together appear to be about the size of Noah’s Ark (450 feet long). Dragging that much timber that high, fabricating and assembling all the intricate wooden joints is too much for this this height and temperature.

6. It is too complicated. It has a bowed hull, three decks, numerous square deep wooden joints for square wooden nails, tongue and grooved joined boards with evidence of handcraft: too intricate and complex to construct under difficult conditions.

7. It is too antique. It antique construction unfamiliar to modern Noah’s Ark Replica builders: wooden nails, mortice-and-tenon joints, and ancient ladders.

8. It is too advanced. It contains advanced wheel-made pottery from Noah’s time (Early Bronze), not the primitive technology that many attribute to the time of Noah.

9. It is too ancient. Surface patina on it does not exist on recently fabricated boards, and there is no known way to fabricate it.

10. It was too quickly constructed. Noah and his family worked on level ground for perhaps 120 years. But no one could build this big ship on a high mountain under these seemingly impossible conditions in the few weeks per year after melt water stops flowing and before winter snow prevents access to the sites.


Evidence for the Discovery of Noah’s Ark
March 24, 2016  Ark Apology
1. Mt. Ararat is the only spot on the earth’s surface that matches the biblical description (Gen. 8:3) of the landing place of Noah’s Ark.

2. A large wooden structure about the size of Noah’s Ark (Gen. 6:14-16) lies broken in 3 sections above 13,500 feet on Mount Ararat.

3. Scattered wreckage indicates that the structure has slid from the top of the mountain along the glacier extending from the south side of the mountain.

4. The top of the mountain is permanently frozen which are excellent conditions for preserving organic artifacts from more than 4000 years ago.

5. Natives whose ancestors lived on and near Mount Ararat report that the structure slid from the saddle of the mountain in the great 1840 earthquake.

6. Wood from the structure carbon dates to about 2800 BC, fitting the biblical era of Noah’s Flood according to chronology in Genesis 5.

7. Pottery found in the structure dates to the Early Bronze Age which fits the biblical date for Noah’s Flood (Gen. 6-9).

8. One section shows nautical features, such as a bowed hull.

9. Ship construction techniques match Early Bronze Age (time of the Flood).

10. Three levels of the structure are visible which fits the biblical data (Gen. 6:16).

11. It is constructed with square wooden pegs inserted into hewn square holes.

12. Fallen boards inside the structure are suitable for cage material.

13. Strong odor rises from lower deck where animal dung would have been.

14. Hull is covered with a dark substance like the pitch on the Ark (Gen. 6:14).

15. Natives of the mountain and surrounding areas have apparently always believed this to be Noah’s Ark and report many visits to the site.

16. Artifacts found in site indicate visits over many centuries from before Christ.

17. It contains compartments with ceiling beams of 7 wooden pegs, possibly for tying or feeding clean animals.

18. I have personally interviewed 5 eyewitnesses who have been in the structure—all of whom are convinced that it is Noah’s Ark (see photos at http://christianleadersandscholars.com/araratwp/video-and-photographic-evidence/ See the books by Philip Williams, The Archaeological Evidence of Noah’s Flood (Charlotte, NC: Christian Leaders & Scholars Press, 2011).

Questions that advocate, that the structure is a hoax or that it was build in more recent times, a film-set staged, must answer providing good reasons and arguments to support such claims. 

Abductive reasoning is the right approach in regards to historical sciences. People that think the site is not Noah's ark, have as well the burden of proof, to refute the site beyond a reasonable doubt, by providing BETTER alternative explanations of what the construction is, and how it got up there to a height of 13500 ft. ( 4100 mts ) I have not seen any of the claimers that the structure is a film-set proving their assertions. Empirical proofs, like photos, videos of the camp near the entrance, the wood being prepared and being brought up to the mountain, pitch being applied to the wooden wall, that would count as empirical evidence to substantiate a hoax-claim. Hearsay, letters that can be the product of forgers, personal attacks, empty accusations are not evidence.  

Navarra did probably find remains of Noah's Ark back in 1955. He did film the removal of wood from the site. The hoax hypothesis would be confirmed, and the burden of proof met if the claimants would be able to provide footage and pictures of the construction camp, wood outside the entrance, being stocked, and prepared to be moved entering the building site. Something like Navarra's footage, where he removes wood from the site. The movie demonstrates the difficulty to move just one wooden trunk. 
The Quest for Noah's Ark ∞ History ∞ Part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMs0zRI79pQ


1. How could such a structure have been constructed at 13,500 feet in the permanent snow cap? I have snapshots of each wood plank with different cuts. I did count just in the site which Philip Williams visited, over 150 planks of different sizes and cuts. Panda lee reported one plank, in his expedition in 2008, to be 20 meters long. Dispersed and buried in ice deep below the surface. In the access tunnels and wood chambers, there are massive stairs made of wood trunks, each at least with a weight of over 200 lbs, buried in ice. There are huge wood walls impregnated with pitch, and curved, like a boat hull. How was all this constructed up there?  

2. How could it have been buried so deep?. Under 20-30 feet of frozen volcanic rock and ice? Sub-freezing temperatures make it virtually impossible to construct a large ship under those conditions.

3. How could it have been made, considering that it is too unstable and dangerous in its location? One site leans precariously on a ledge, another on the side of a glacier slowing moving down the mountain. Large rocks regularly tumble the mountain burying the structure and threatening the life of workers.

4. It is a huge structure. It is in at least two pieces which together appear to be about the size of Noah’s Ark (450 feet long). How could it have been made, dragging that much timber that high, fabricating and assembling all the intricate wooden joints ? is it not too much for this height and temperature?

5. It is too complicated. It has a bowed hull, three decks, numerous square deep wooden joints for square wooden nails, tongue and grooved joined boards with evidence of handcraft: Would it not be too intricate and complex to construct under such difficult conditions?

6. It contains pottery, food remains skeletons of animals and various artifacts of ancient age.

7. If it is of recent construction, why is there surface patina on it which does not exist on recently fabricated boards, and there is no known way to fabricate it?

8. Noah and his family worked on level ground for perhaps 120 years. How could someone build this big ship on a high mountain under these seemingly impossible conditions in the few weeks per year after meltwater stops flowing and before winter snow prevents access to the sites?

9. How could the structure be of recent construction, in snow and ice, how would the spider webs there have come about? Did the hoaxsters place the web there by hand? Really? Wow! I would sure like to see how that was done. Or, are we to believe that a spider living near the construction site climbed into the recesses of the structure soon after the workers left the area and built a web and an old looking web at that? Both of these ideas are fanciful at best! The web itself shows that either the spider web was there from the beginning and has been preserved in a state of deep freeze or it was made long before recent times and the structure has remained undisturbed for many years. Neither option fits the current hoax theory.  I still see no problem of spiders in such high altitudes:
Zoogeography of Arachnida 2018, page 866
Concerning the mountains of Eurasia, the high-altitude spiders are relatively well-known (Pyrenees, Alps, Pirin, and other Bulgarian mountains, Caucasus, and the Himalayas). As a model for comparison, we use the most numerous and varied family in all high mountains – Linyphiidae (Erigoninae included). Over 2200 m in separate mountain systems, the following genera and species of Linyphiidae are represented: Pyrenees – 39 genera, 65 species
Alps – 44 genera, 101 species Rila – Pirin – Vitosha – Stara planina – 30 genera, 55 species Caucasus – 51 genera, 84 species Himalayas – 21 genera, 52 species

10. How can advocates that claim the site is a Hoax based on articles like Answers in Genesis be so sure that the radiocarbon dating done so far is accurate when we know otherwise? Inaccuracies in radiocarbon dating
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/06/180605112057.htm
June 5, 2018
Cornell University

Radiocarbon dating is a key tool archaeologists use to determine the age of plants and objects made with organic material. But new research shows that commonly accepted radiocarbon dating standards can miss the mark -- calling into question historical timelines.

The Dutch expeditions

Dutch Archaeologist Confirms: Remains of Wooden Structure and Pottery Found on Mount Ararat, Turkey
https://www.newswire.com/dutch-archaeologist-confirms-remains/280034

Let's find out the truth about the past
https://web.archive.org/web/20140703065335/http://factforward.com/

In March, a team consisting of Turkish, Dutch and Belgian members found wood remains and pottery at an altitude of 4,000 meters on Mt Ararat, Turkey. They calls for community support for a follow-up scientific investigation in September this year.

PRESS RELEASE  JUN 19, 2014
June 19, 2014 (Newswire.com) - By the end of March 2014, a team consisting of Turkish, Dutch and Belgian members launched an expedition on Mount Ararat, Turkey and found at an altitude of 4.000 meters remains of a possible wooden structure and also pottery. Jeroen Rensen, a Dutch archaeologist from the team, was pleased with the success of the expedition. He says, "It was very tough. Heavy winds and snowstorms made the first two attempts to reach the site fail. The third and last all-or-nothing attempt succeeded and the team reached the location. There, in a fissure within the icecap under 10 meters of rock, ice and snow we found well-preserved wooden remains and pottery too." Later this year a major scientific expedition will conduct a follow-up investigation to determine what the artifacts and wooden remains constitute.

Another witness is a Belgian physician, Dr. Marcel Verheyen. In response to the critics that wood and artifacts were deliberately planted, he says, "That is absolutely impossible. The mountain's terrible terrain is rather inaccessible, let alone to carry beams of wood. You need to be there and see it with your own eyes, before you put forward any hypothesis. I am 100% sure that it is impossible to plant such a structure there."

Recent reports of discovery of wood remains on Mount Ararat were made in 2010 by a Hong Kong based Christian group, NAMI (Noah's Ark Ministries International), yet the finding has been overshadowed by lot of criticisms. The site documented by Rensen and Verheyen in March is in the vicinity of the claim made a few years back. Participating in the expedition as independent investigators, Rensen and Verheyen do not want to engage into the controversy, but conduct a step-by-step scientific exploration with a multi-disciplinary scientific team. Rensen says, "The question of whether there are any wooden remains at all on Mount Ararat has been answered. But so many questions still remain. The main question to be answered now is: What type of site do the remains at this location represent?"

Walter Tiemessen, a veteran Dutch media expert, has been following the development of the discovery for 4 years, and is determined to find out the ultimate truth. "Many people immediately relate the discovery of wood specimens on Mount Ararat to Noah's Ark, but I will not jump to any conclusion. The more I studied the evidence from the mountain, the more I believe it is something very special. Be it the Ark of Noah or not, it definitely deserves careful investigation without bias. We need community support for our endeavor, so we will be able to reveal the truth to the world."

Crowdfunding has been proven to be a successful source to finance creative and science projects. Tiemessen says, "With sufficient funding, we can make the scientific exploration happen, and the whole process will be documented on video. Everything will be under strict scientific protocol. Only then can we provide a satisfactory answer to the curious world. And I expect the project on Mount Ararat will be carried on for many years to come, it is only the first step to take."

==============================================================================================================================

Enigma Of Mount Ararat – Researchers Are Determined To Reveal The Truth To The World

http://www.messagetoeagle.com/search-for-noahs-ark-continues-the-inside-mount-ararat-research-project/

By the end of March 2014, a team consisting of Turkish, Dutch and Belgian members launched an expedition on Mount Ararat, Turkey and found at an altitude of 4.000 meters remains of a possible wooden structure and also pottery.

They call for community support for a follow-up scientific investigation in September this year.

“It was very tough. Heavy winds and snowstorms made the first two attempts to reach the site fail. The third and last all-or-nothing attempt succeeded and the team reached the location. There, in a fissure within the icecap under 10 meters of rock, ice and snow we found well-preserved wooden remains and pottery too,” Jeroen Rensen, a Dutch archaeologist from the team, said.

Later this year a major scientific expedition will conduct a follow-up investigation to determine what the artifacts and wooden remains constitute.


In response to the critics that wood and artifacts were deliberately planted, a Belgian physician, Dr. Marcel Verheyen said as follows:

“That is absolutely impossible. The mountain’s terrible terrain is rather inaccessible, let alone to carry beams of wood. You need to be there and see it with your own eyes, before you put forward any hypothesis. I am 100% sure that it is impossible to plant such a structure there.”

Recent reports of discovery of wood remains on Mount Ararat were made in 2010 by a Hong Kong based Christian group, NAMI (Noah’s Ark Ministries International), yet the finding has been overshadowed by lot of criticisms. The site documented by Rensen and Verheyen in March is in the vicinity of the claim made a few years back.

==============================================================================================================================

The Quest for Noah's Ark
https://www.youtube.com/user/MysteryOfMountArarat/videos

The Quest for Noah's Ark ∞ Fact or Fiction Part 8 ∞ August 2011 Geological Explanation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYkJ8-YQGRw
07:20
the Arctic textual methods do not resemble and based structures but are more consistent with a maritime architecture we're dealing with an ancient archaeological assemblage that has not been manipulated and that has not been that is not a product of a fraud


Enigma Of Mount Ararat – Researchers Are Determined To Reveal The Truth To The World

http://www.messagetoeagle.com/search-for-noahs-ark-continues-the-inside-mount-ararat-research-project/

By the end of March 2014, a team consisting of Turkish, Dutch and Belgian members launched an expedition on Mount Ararat, Turkey and found at an altitude of 4.000 meters remains of a possible wooden structure and also pottery.

In response to the critics that wood and artifacts were deliberately planted, a Belgian physician, Dr. Marcel Verheyen said as follows:

“That is absolutely impossible. The mountain’s terrible terrain is rather inaccessible, let alone to carry beams of wood. You need to be there and see it with your own eyes, before you put forward any hypothesis. I am 100% sure that it is impossible to plant such a structure there.”

They call for community support for a follow-up scientific investigation in September this year.

“It was very tough. Heavy winds and snowstorms made the first two attempts to reach the site fail. The third and last all-or-nothing attempt succeeded and the team reached the location. There, in a fissure within the icecap under 10 meters of rock, ice and snow we found well-preserved wooden remains and pottery too,” Jeroen Rensen, a Dutch archaeologist from the team, said.

Later this year a major scientific expedition will conduct a follow-up investigation to determine what the artifacts and wooden remains constitute.

Recent reports of discovery of wood remains on Mount Ararat were made in 2010 by a Hong Kong based Christian group, NAMI (Noah’s Ark Ministries International), yet the finding has been overshadowed by lot of criticisms. The site documented by Rensen and Verheyen in March is in the vicinity of the claim made a few years back.

Dutch Archaeologist Confirms: 
Remains of Wooden Structure and Pottery Found on Mount Ararat, Turkey





Video clip trailer: The Mystery of Mount Ararat - Dr. Marcel Verheyen
Jul 12, 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbP_vX-mb6c


Video clip trailer: The Mystery of Mount Ararat - Jeroen Rensen
Jul 12, 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNB8RNU7axY

The pottery and miscellaneous artifacts found on the site on Mount Ararat

http://www.araratpreservation.com/new-page-1































































This pot matches the Khirbet Kerak assemblage








http://www.araratpreservation.com/new-gallery-3

Pitch, evidence of the Ark found

According to the Bible, God told Noah to use pitch, a waterproof material to paint it inside and outside.

Genesis 6:14 Make yourself an ark [tebah] of gopher wood. Make rooms in the ark, and cover it inside and out with pitch [kopher].

The pitch for Noah’s Ark
https://creation.com/the-pitch-for-noahs-ark

Pitch is a black glue-like substance left behind when coal tar is heated or distilled. It belongs to the same family of substances as asphalt or bitumen. Today, it is largely produced by heating coal. Most modern geologists know of no other source for it. But coal tar and petroleum are not the only source for pitch. Anyone who takes the time to consult a reasonable dictionary of geology will find that pitch can be extracted by distilling or heating wood. In fact, prior to the rise of the petroleum and coal industries, this was exactly how pitch was made.

http://www.araratpreservation.com/new-page-1

Ararat Prehistoric Sites Exhibit Widespread Use of Pitch
http://www.releasewire.com/press-releases/ararat-prehistoric-sites-exhibit-widespread-use-of-pitch-196053.htm
Harvard University educated archaeologist and president of the archaeological contract firm PRC, Inc., Dr. Joel Klenck, reports that prehistoric sites on Mount Ararat in Turkey exhibit an extensive use of pitch, a thick elastic polymer made from naturally occurring petroleum products or plants.

The case of Joel Klenck

Dr.Joel Klencks channel on YouTube of Noah's ark:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2t3euCykE-o


Dr. Joel Klenck attempts to prevent a cultural atrocity, the destruction of Noah's Ark, near the summit of greater Mount Ararat, by decomposition and looting. Dr. Klenck will show for the first time to the global public the location of Noah’s Ark, its features, and artifacts. The earliest artifacts and features evidence an origin around 9,650 BC, following conventional science, while other radio isotope dates indicate an origin between 2,500 and 2,400 BC, supporting chronologies from the Bible and Quran. Dr. Klenck will explain why this site is a prehistoric maritime barge that was built by Noah as opposed to a terrestrial structure built by persons from epics like Utnapishtim. After discussing historic iconography and pathways on Ararat, Dr. Klenck discusses future topics such as different routes to Noah’s Ark, its location, profile, and surface features leading into the structure. Dr. Klenck also notes why Noah’s Ark was concealed for so long and its importance as a Rosetta Stone between faith and science.

Min: 6:16
We'll discuss why Noah's Ark is so important to science and religion because it is the Rosetta Stone between science and faith the biggest being the dating of the origins of the ark where the artifacts and the series present a series of radioisotope dates showing an origin of 9650 BC which conforms to current scientific dates on the transition between the Pleistocene and the Holocene and of the Stone Age and
the beginning of the farming age and then on the same samples there's another set of dates to 2500 BC which conform to biblical and Quranic dates for Noah's Flood the data from 9650 BC
confirmed to many aspect of just many aspects of the description of Noah's Ark in the Bible in the Quran rapid rise of global sea levels the filling of the deserts like the Sahara the ruble Collie and the
Atacama with water the extinction of the megafauna and most species in Australia North and South America

the destruction of all but one human species our own the global eradication of human populations where the resemblance of the archaeological culture survived but not the human population's tremendous geological activity and the transition from the end of the Stone Age to the beginning of the farming age the secular scientific community missed the relevance of these data but now with the reality of Noah's Ark on Mount Ararat the Pleistocene Holocene transition will be analyzed for what it is Noah's Flood a unique and horrific extinction event

the knowledge of the location and the reality of Noah's Ark and the global flood will prompt the realization that Genesis and some of the accounts in the Quran regarding Noah are true and represent a paradigm shift from the rejection of the spiritual and blind allegiance to the secular to the increasing acceptance of the spiritual and rejection of the secular Noah's Ark is a miracle but miracle that can be tested measured examined and will prompt humanity to question atheism and agnosticism will also prompt the rejection of the paradigms of the last 150 years and forge a new understanding of our origins our commonality how truly special we are.


According to Joel Klenck, this is the location of the Ark.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-1NnY7Ln_MI1NzCX3E8Cew/videos

http://www.araratpreservation.com/

http://www.paleorc.com/PaleontologicalResearchCorporation-bio-joelklenck.asp

Impressive:
https://hosianna.dk/upload_dir/shop/Noahs-Ark-A5-haefte-2018.pdf

Things from man's time are now found in 'Noah's Ark' on Mt. Ararat

The American archaeologist, dr. Joel Klenck, brought new in early 2013 information and photos that further prove that it is a real - and a lot spectacular finds found on Mt. Ararat of the Sino-Kurdish group.
Shortly after the Stone Age Dr. Klenck documents in a number of scientific articles that the sites of the Mount Ararat in Turkey does not simply contain a large wooden structure which appears to stretch
over 100 meters under rock and ice on the mountain. The find also contains a number of items that date back to the "cold, dry winter ”, which conventional archeology believes followed the ice age of ca. 10-20,000 years ago. It was after this cold, dry period that man began to cultivate the land as agriculture in Eastern Turkey. We are thus fully back in the transition period from the Stone Age to the Bronze and Iron Age. Klenck estimates that “the archaeological sites at Ararat, which include the impressive wood construction, smaller woodwork and a cave, date from the Late Epipalaeolithic (Middle Stone Age) period (13,100 to 9,600 BC).

https://web.archive.org/web/20140703065335/http://factforward.com/

New Support for Alleged Noah’s Ark Discovery
Posted November 11th, 2011 by paleorc
Archaeologist states there is scientific merit to recent discovery of site associated with the legendary ark of Noah.

Miami, FL, United States., November 10, 2011 - (PressReleasePoint) - In 2010, the Hong Kong organization Noah’s Ark Ministries International or NAMI announced they had discovered the legendary vessel on Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey and were subsequently accused of perpetrating a hoax. Now, a professional archaeologist states there is significant merit to their discovery.

Harvard University educated archaeologist and director of the Paleontological Research Corporation, Joel Klenck, surveyed the site, analyzed the archaeological remains and completed a comparative study. “The site is remarkable”, states Klenck, “and comprises a large all-wood structure with an archaeological assemblage that appears to be mostly from the Late Epipaleolithic Period.” These assemblages at other sites in the Near East have calibrated radiocarbon dates between 13,100 and 9,600 B.C. Located at elevations above 4,200 meters on Mount Ararat and covered by layers of ice and stones, he states: “The site is wonderfully preserved, exhibits a wide array of plant materials including structures made of cypress and one room with a floor covered by chickpea seeds.” Klenck additionally notes, “I was most impressed by the artifactual assemblage, particularly the basalt bowls, stone cores and debitage.”

It also appears that the site was visited in later periods. Two small ceramic bowls from the Chalcolithic (5,800-3,000 B.C.) and Bronze Age (3,000-1,200 B.C.) periods were placed in one of the rooms of the structure. He adds, “These artifacts most likely represent brief later visits to the site since these bowls differ from the Epipaleolithic remains that comprise nearly all of the assemblage.”

Klenck reports, “The surface scatter of the wood above the large structure is 121.1 meters in length and 23.8 meters in width. The construction is at least 5.2 meters deep and several measurements of the exterior walls exhibit angles moving inward toward the base of the edifice. Also, there are stair-like features that descend through the middle of the multi-storied structure and mortise-and-tenon construction.” He remarks, “That this large wood structure is located on Mount Ararat, with what appears to be a mostly Epipaleolithic assemblage, is noteworthy.”

“The site is no hoax,” Klenck states, “and the size and excellent preservation of the edifice will enable it to be studied by numerous scholars.” He notes, “The large wood structure is buried under tons of stones and ice and most of the edifice remains unexplored.”

Regarding the initial carbon dating of the site at 4,800 B.C. by NAMI, Klenck states the initial discovery team comprised people with limited archaeological experience. He remarks, “Instead of obtaining samples from cores and unexposed locales and wrapping them in tin-foil, surface samples were retrieved with bare hands or cotton gloves. The date most likely reflects a sample that was contaminated by ancient visitors or modern explorers to the site. Most of the assemblage portrays a much earlier period.” He notes that all future radiocarbon samples should be delivered to archaeology departments at Istanbul University that will date the artifacts or send the samples to archaeometry facilities at the University of Berlin.

He also notes that a nearby cave exhibits artifacts similar to those in the large wood structure. Klenck states the cave site possesses botanical remains of chickpea, flax fibers and rope, pieces of fabric, bone artifacts, and vessels made of an organic material. He adds, “In both the large wood structure and cave, most of the bowls are made of an organic material, perhaps animal stomachs, and the flaps are folded over wood or bone collars. Several of these bowls resemble early ceramic types from the subsequent Pottery Neolithic Period (6,400-5,800 B.C.).” Klenck opines, “These artifacts prompt questions if bowls made from organic materials influenced the first pottery styles.”

“These sites are extremely important for archaeologists and conservators,” states Klenck, “particularly with regard to the preservation of wood and plant materials and the examination of architectural features. He is emphatic that the Antiquities Authority of Turkey needs to protect the research area and allow only approved archaeologists and conservators to visit the sites. “These precautions must be completed”, remarks Klenck, “to prevent adventurers and local mountain guides from breaking off pieces of wood and removing artifacts from the research area.”

He states the initial skepticism of the archaeological community is understandable but will fade as more researchers and conservators complete their analyses and publish reports in scientific journals. Klenck adds, “Here, the evidence is wide ranging. Also, very little of the structure is surveyed and much of the site is inaccessible being covered or blocked by ice.”

The discoveries on Mount Ararat coincide with academic discussions on the transition between the Pleistocene and Holocene epochs during the Younger Dryas stadial (10,900-9,500 B.C.) and the beginning of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic Period, around 9,600 B.C., where the first village communities in southeastern Turkey became associated with intensive agriculture and plant and animal domestication. Klenck states, “Some scholars see this transition period as cataclysmic with dramatic increases in sea-levels, flooding, animal extinctions, and decreases in human populations; others assert this phase was simply a cold, dry period evidenced by sparse vegetation.” “In the midst of this debate,” he notes, “there is a large all-wood structure and a cave, with artifacts resembling an Epipaleolithic assemblage, at a high elevation on Mount Ararat.” Klenck concludes: “The Ararat sites are very special because of their preservation and unique insight into the prehistoric past.”

Press Contact:
Joel Klenck
Paleontological Research Corporation
6800 Bird Road, Ste 381, Miami, FL 33155

https://www.pr

Noah's Ark Discovery: Prehistoric Site on Mount Ararat Represents 'Super Bowl of Archaeology' [Pictures]
Dr. Joel Klenck, who received his B.S. in Anthropology/Archaeology from Northwestern University and A.M. and Ph.D. from Harvard University in the same discipline, said in his reports released through his company, “In essence, the association between the prehistoric sites on Mount Ararat and Noah’s Ark involves two questions. The first question is whether the archaeological features on Mount Ararat correlate with aspects of the various accounts of Noah’s Ark in the Torah (Old Testament), Quran, and other sightings in history? My answer to this question: Yes.”
https://www.gospelherald.com/article/international/47972/noahs-ark-discovery-prehistoric-site-on-mount-ararat-represents-super-bowl-of-archaeology-pictures.htm

Miscellaneous links

5th INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM OF MOUNT ARARAT AND NOAH'S ARK ABSTRACT BOOK
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338012719_5th_INTERNATIONAL_SYMPOSIUM_OF_MOUNT_ARARAT_AND_NOAH'S_ARK_ABSTRACT_BOOK

http://www.araratpreservation.com/

Noahsarksearch
https://web.archive.org/web/20110720104701/http://www.noahsarksearch.net/eng/

http://www.arkinsight.nl/press-photos-2/

Raiders of Noah's Ark
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vq_Ar33DWTw&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR1n9bcmIM_7L5Ie4L2Ga93xIRcS8iw_Zdrktf_Nh_GXgU3EFONX136GgXM

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1823369317908526

Background Real Name Turkish Guide Parasut Ahmet Ertugrul Noah’s Ark Discoverer Mount Ararat Turkish Mountain Exploration First Time Discovered NAMI Documented Wooden Wreckage Noah’s Ark Climb 2008 High Altitude Glaciers Volcanic Rock Covering Evidence Proof Find Real Deal Biblical Ark Vessel Summer Validation Confirmation Expeditions 2010
https://dancingfromgenesis.wordpress.com/2010/05/18/background-real-name-turkish-guide-parasut-ahmet-ertugrul-noahs-ark-discoverer-mount-ararat-turkish-mountain-exploration-first-time-discovered-nami-documented-wooden-wreckage-noahs-ark-climb-2008/

genesisveracityfoundation
http://genesisveracityfoundation.com/

https://noahsfloodnoahsark.wordpress.com/tag/turkey/page/6/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPpKnwh3AvE&sns=fb&fbclid=IwAR17BKcRZdtfx0dYE65JWpiZISdpCQ57CqCiUxFW-21TJ0MaKJGGEsgru9Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHaOSUyM7-Y&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR0UT29OsuylS5Xijbnv-bdQv09fRoGO6wIlLL_zw1Zzqto6Z8uUwcetVrc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kAgfh_-oSY

https://www.newswire.com/dutch-archaeologist-confirms-remains/280034

https://web.archive.org/web/20140703065335/http://factforward.com/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbP_vX-mb6c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNB8RNU7axY

https://www.ucg.org/the-good-news/god-science-and-the-bible-has-noahs-ark-been-found-buried-under-ice-on-mt-ararat
https://nwcreation.net/noahsightings.html
http://www.noahtherealstory.com/the-search.html
https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/12317425/the-kurdish-guides-and-the-noahs-ark-michael-s-heiser
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1269165/Noahs-Ark-remains-discovered-mountain-Turkey.html

The wooden structures at the site on Mount Ararat

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t2940-noah-s-ark-has-been-found-with-high-certainty-on-mount-ararat#7503

The NAMI team that visited the site on mount Ararat in 2010 did report seven different chambers. The amount of wood, huge curved walls is hard to estimate.  Philip Williams did enter the site in 2014 at an entrance that was uncovered in 2011. I did analyze his video footage, and took a screenshot of every new sequence, showing different kinds of wooden planks with different sections, cuts, and different sizes. I did catalogize at least 150 different planks, including massive wood stairs carved from massive wood trunks. All buried deep below volcanic rocks and Ice. Wood, that looks very old. The structure is massive. Even if pictures don't do justice to fathom the size of the site and construction, it can be seen that the wooden walls are huge and massive.  

Many pictures show spider webs, and at the NAMI movie, a living spider crawling around. The spider webbing was referred to as proof that the structure is a hoax actually proves it is not.  Euophrys omnisuperstes, the Himalayan jumping spider lives at elevations of up to 6,700 m in the Himalayas. So spiders can live at such high altitudes. If the structure was recently built at nearly 14, 000 ft. in snow and ice, how would the web have come about? Did the hoaxsters place the web there by hand? Really? Wow! I would sure like to see how that was done. Or, are we to believe that a spider living near the construction site climbed into the recesses of the structure soon after the workers left the area and built web and an old looking web at that? Both of these ideas are fanciful at best! The web itself show that either the spider web was there from the beginning and has been preserved in a state of deep freeze or it was made long before recent times and the structure has remained undisturbed for many years. Neither option fits the hoax theory. Thus, this find should be looked at with much greater care.


If someone wants to deny that the structure is Noah's ark, good alternative reasons will have to be found to explain how this structure did end up on 4100 mts on Mount Ararat. Including not only the various kinds of old  wood, but also the pottery, the artifacts that look VERY old, the pitch on the wooden walls that match the biblical description. 



(a) Space 4 – Beams of wood with a nail on one side of the wall. It is believed that the rope was hooked over there to keep animals.
(b) Space 4 – Racks are found on the walls.
(c) Space 4 – The door that looks very small.
(d) Space 5 – Like a tunnel that connects the two places.
(e) Space 5 – Wood had rotted in this space.
(f) Space 6 – A door in the ceiling found. It can be concluded that the wooden structure has more than one floor.
(g) Space 6 – A wooden ladder is found in several structures.
(h) Space 7 – The height and width is estimated each measuring 5 meters and 12 meters.
(i) Space 2 – It is buried under ice and volcanic rocks.










































































































The structure visited by the  2014 expeditions using an entrance discovered in 2011

https://noahsfloodnoahsark.wordpress.com/category/chapter-07-claims-nami-noahs-ark-ministries-international/

(a) Space 4 – Beams of wood with a nail on one side of the wall. It is believed that the rope was hooked over there to keep animals.
(b) Space 4 – Racks are found on the walls.
(c) Space 4 – The door that looks very small.
(d) Space 5 – Like a tunnel that connects the two places.
(e) Space 5 – Wood had rotted in this space.
(f) Space 6 – A door in the ceiling found. It can be concluded that the wooden structure has more than one floor.
(g) Space 6 – A wooden ladder is found in several structures.
(h) Space 7 – The height and width is estimated each measuring 5 meters and 12 meters.
(i) Space 2 – It is buried under ice and volcanic rocks.

Randall W. Younker Ph.D. Professor of Archaeology and History of Antiquity Director,  (Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Archaeology)
I think this discovery could be very important.  I had not paid much attention to it before--indeed, was skeptical.  But since I have been looking into it more, studying the images and talking to a number of people involved--including two people I know and trust who have actually been to the site, I am convinced it is not a recent fraud or fake--it has been up there for some time--so it is a legitimate archaeological site.  As such, it deserves a careful study--if possible.

Starting at 41:50, Randall W. Younker talks about the recent expedition by Philip Williams. 
https://vimeo.com/channels/987210/397152658?fbclid=IwAR2y0IZtJNkCyy8_-eAZCXak6ZWDkxLKZ8rH3xBkX6afFEwd3EPjhwFsliI

https://www.andrews.edu/sem/faculty_staff/faculty/randall-younker.html
https://andrewsarchaeology.org/museum/

At least two artifacts are not verifiably from the site at Mount Ararat.

The metal book mentioned was found in Jordan:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1371290/70-metal-books-Jordan-cave-change-view-Biblical-history.html

and the Bible is from the region but was confiscated by looters.

Vatican In Shock As 1,500-Year-Old Bible Claims Jesus Wasn’t Crucified
https://mbfpage.blogspot.com/2019/07/vatican-in-shock-as-1500-year-old-bible_10.html

What this means is, that the two artifacts were probably originally not found inside the structure at Mount Ararat. I was unable to verify the other artifacts. It means NOTHING ELSE. It does NOT follow, that, therefore, Dr.Younker is promoting a hoax, or deceiving and lying purposefully in regards of the structure as a whole. I neither means, that the place was not visited in ancient times by pilgrims. This does not diminish the speech or all other evidence provided. Abductive reasoning is the right approach in regards to historical sciences. People that think the site is not Noah's ark, have as well the burden of proof, to refute the site beyond a reasonable doubt, by providing BETTER alternative explanations of what the construction is, and how it got up there to a height of 13000 ft.

This is Dr.Younker's reply to my e-mail in regards of the artifacts that probably did not come from the archaeological site:
Also, on the artifacts,  I am aware that the metal book from Jordan (which I have been aware of from my work in Jordan) and one of the other leather manuscripts with gold writing which I showed were not from the ark site. I had placed these pictures in the slides merely to give more examples of what such ancient books can look like--it should be noted that many think the Jordan example is a fraud.  I have used those slides of other ancient manuscripts in other presentations and discussed them at that time more specifically.  I don't recall that I had time to discuss them in the lecture you apparently saw--clearly that left a false impression with you (and Philip?)--I was running out of time so that I went through several pictures at the end without really commenting on them.  That is the problem with posting presentations without benefit of getting the full information that may have come out in the subsequent question and answer period or in the other lectures that were not posted where I had more time to explain.   As I said, the one leather book with the pictures (an illuminated manuscript on leather) is said to have come from one of the three ark sites on Ararat--that is what I was told--but I don't know that for a fact. We asked to see the manuscript when we were at Ararat; it should be subjected to scientific analysis-- but we have not seen it in person yet.  The fact that there is a question about its provenance is one of the problems that occurs when amateurs remove materials from an archaeological site without proper procedures and documentations--a cloud will be cast upon their validity that is hard to remove.  With proper testing and analysis we can probably provide a good date for the manuscript (I have my suspicions of when it was made in the late medieval period), but we likely won't be able to establish its provenance (unless some material from its find spot adheres to its surface somehow and we can match it up).



















The metal book was found in Jordan, not on Mount Ararat, so this is false information. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1371290/70-metal-books-Jordan-cave-change-view-Biblical-history.html











Vatican In Shock As 1,500-Year-Old Bible Claims Jesus Wasn’t Crucified
https://mbfpage.blogspot.com/2019/07/vatican-in-shock-as-1500-year-old-bible_10.html

This interview with Parasut, which did find the remains of a wooden structure on Mount Ararat, which I and many others think is the ark, explains some interesting things.

Some have outlined that the videos of the expeditions seem to show different places. Like the wood chambers with the spider nets, and food on the floor, appear to be at different places than the place visited by Philip Williams.

In this interview with Parasut, it becomes clear, why. In 1840, there was a volcanic eruption. Until then, the ark was on top of the mountain. With the eruption, the ark moved down with volcanic rocks and broke into three parts. One part gave a halt at 4900 mts of altitude, and another part moved further down to 4200 mts of altitude. In the middle of the crevasse, on the south of the mountain.

Only Panda Lee visited the site at 4900 mts. There are the big round chambers, with wooden walls. It is called Site A.

Further down is the other part, probably broke in another two parts. There is site B, and site C. There are several different entrances.

This makes the hoax hypothesis far more unlikely, and the hypothesis likely, that it is IS Noah's ark. The more I investigate, the more it becomes clear what happened.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGEqtuKv0m0

Finding Noah (2015) Movie

https://web.facebook.com/findingnoahfilm/

https://web.archive.org/web/20180825155231/http://www.findingnoah.com/

https://www.amazon.com/Finding-Noah-Gary-Sinise/dp/B017RR68C2
I began to question if this was an account of stupidity or a documentary with a goal. Its like a bunch of Amway salesmen convinced each other they would find Noahs Ark. Might as well watch Jackass, at least they intentionally make fools of themselves.

The film ends with how 'The Ark is not yet found' (read: hogwash) and makes it look like a fairytale! How can Godly people still be traipsing around even looking?

More about the people than the mission. Nobody until the end talked about the fact the Arc could have been lost in a crevasse. Makes you think if they are being realistic on the mission.

So terribly disappointed....the movie was in great detail about the struggle to find the Ark but no results.

About Finding Noah Documentary
https://www.ararattrekkingtours.com/about-finding-noah-documentary/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnOz5re7OCs

In Search of Noah's Ark - Part 1 / Digging Up The Past - Francois DuPlessis

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvmFmBOTIFk&list=PLfpRySqe-6feZLHoU_g3mBqCbJ-VQM05d


In Search of Noah's Ark (Noah's Posterity) - Part 2 / Digging Up The Past - Francois DuPlessis

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OI_5HjO6yrU


In Search of Noah's Ark - Noah's Posterity (3/8 ): Digging Up The Past

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFl5U9w1wbM&t=646s

WOOD FROM "MOUNT ARARAT": NOAH'S ARK?
https://sci-hub.tw/https://www.jstor.org/stable/3209528?seq=1

In conclusion, radiocarbon analysis leads us to the firm conviction that the beams of wood found on Buyuk Aghri Daghi by Fernand Navarra are not older than the 7-8th centuries A.D. The nonradiocarbon analyses which would date the wood much earlier have proved to have little or no value. We agree with John Morris, who, we suspect, would like to have been able to conclude otherwise, when he states: "The Navarra wood remains highly questionable in origin, and Navarra's claim to have found the Ark is at best premature" (Morris 1977: iv)

http://www.mountainararattrek.com/ark/arkfraud3b.htm

TV talk show about Noah's Ark fraud May 2, 2010

Start at 6:00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhXF0XWGIew

https://harun-yahya.net/en/Short-videos---Dont-miss/24991/noahs-ark-has-been-found

2012-05-28 派斯博士（Dr. Randall Price）專訪第一節 Interview with Dr.Randall Price Part 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYlIXWBVWCg&feature=youtu.be


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3pVdKSCWWA&t=6s


He says that the two workers who built the movie set for NAMI told him the story. He is lying.
He is such a phony. He speaks about 2700-year-old wood from Iran castle. Nonsense. Wood doesn’t last that long unless frozen or always dry desert. He speaks as if he is an archaeologist. Yet he is violating antiquities laws there on Mount Ararat.
He says that he knows that insects are on the top of Mount Ararat. But not spiderwebs in an enclosed space. How does he know this?

Noah's Ark has been found with high probability on Mount Ararat

Recently, I met Philip Williams on Facebook and learned that he did visit the site at Mount Ararat, in Turkey, in 2014. He did send me a link of the videos of his expedition:

Search on YouTube: First American Visit to the Mount Ararat Discovery
Second Deck Noah's Ark

- Gilbert H. Grosvenor, Editor, National Geographic Magazine
“If the ark of Noah is ever found, it will be the greatest archaeological discovery in history and the greatest event since the Resurrection of Christ; and it will alter all the currents of scientific thought.”

Many remember the news ten years ago. Noah's Ark Ministries International (NAMI), mostly a Chinese team, did make an expedition to Mount Ararat back in 2009 and reached the remains of a large wooden structure at a 13,500-ft. elevation ( 4100 mts ) and dated it as 4,800 years old, claiming that it was with high certainty Noah’s Ark. It seemed almost too good to be true. This would be the most amazing archaeological discovery, and enormously back up the biblical story of Noah's flood, and give credence to the biblical account in genesis.

Randall W. Younker Ph.D. Professor of Archaeology and History of Antiquity Director, (Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Archaeology)
I think this discovery could be very important. I had not paid much attention to it before--indeed, was skeptical. But since I have been looking into it more, studying the images and talking to a number of people involved--including two people I know and trust who have actually been to the site, I am convinced it is not a recent fraud or fake--it has been up there for some time--so it is a legitimate archaeological site. As such, it deserves a careful study--if possible.

New footages released by Gerrit Aalten in the last few days, of the 2009 NAMI expedition on Mount Ararat, where they investigated a huge wooden structure, with wooden walls with pitch, which in my understanding is with high probability Noah's Ark.

Observations archaeological discovery mount Ararat (p1)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Lpz2mMJz-4

Observations archaeological discovery mount Ararat (p2)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zalc1yk8grU

Observations archaeological discovery mount Ararat (p3)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGQ85Glsa4Q

Noah's Ark has been found with high probability on Mount Ararat
https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t2940-noah-s-ark-has-been-found-with-high-probability-on-mount-ararat

Don Patton, and Murat Sahin, were the two main sources for the claim that the wooden structure found on Mount Ararat was a hoax. I had a long conversations with them, and both were not able to provide a SHRED  of hard evidence backing up the claim. Following is the recorded phone call:

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t2940-noah-s-ark-has-been-found-with-high-probability-on-mount-ararat#8503

Conversation with Don Patton:
https://ln5.sync.com/dl/60861bd20/7dj5yzu9-dpb39iur-mye7zvdf-imiqvz2s

Conversation with Murat Sahin:
https://ln5.sync.com/dl/da9e69130/rnzb6d94-yage4229-qe4guud2-2hmeswi6

The folded rock layers in the Grand Canyon show microscopic evidence, data, that demonstrates the layers were still soft when folded.
Folded rock layers, a testament to the global flood.
https://assets.answersingenesis.org/doc/articles/pdf-versions/arj/v14/petrology_tapeats_sandstone.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3dRyAtFs0iP3xUb9_XVPGVuginemUslGxfJ3MUheU9adJvgN48wES6LyY