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
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.
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.
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:
First American Visit to the Mount Ararat Discovery
Second Deck Noah's Ark
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 movie about the expedition of the NAMI team, in 2010:
The Days of Noah 2 - Apocalypse (deutsche UT)
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
The Hoax accusation was endorsed and supported by major YEC ministries, like Creation.com:
The ‘Hong Kong ark’ fiasco
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
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.
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.
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
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
June 5, 2018
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.
Last edited by Admin on Sat May 30, 2020 8:35 pm; edited 46 times in total