And on review, I find that none of the creationists have addressed my question about the similarities between human and ape DNA. And 2long has mentioned the basic problem with the mountain piece.

Do you creationists really not have any evidence at all?

Regards,
rs0522

Just found in the news that Noah's Ark may have been found on a mountain in Iran (which would make sense according to the Bible). Thought I would put this article below for those that want to ponder. There are also pictures of the site out there now on the Internet. ABC News ran the story today, with the pics. Anyway, here it is:

-----------------------

How many times have you yawned at the claim “Noah’s Ark Has Been Discovered”? Right, you say, and Elvis has been sighted again, too. People who hoped to find the famous vessel and the legendary voice have been pretty much in the same boat (so to speak)—No proof. Until today.



Led by explorer, adventurer, and featured Worldview Weekend speaker Dr. Bob Cornuke, a fourteen man crew returned this week from Iran bearing stunning evidence that theirs is the long-anticipated even coveted discovery of the remains of Noah’s Ark. Bob’s team consisted of a Who’s Who of business, law, and ministry leaders including Barry Rand (former CEO of Avis), the author and Christian apologist Josh McDowell, Frank Turek (co-author with Norm Geisler of I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist), Boone Powell (former CEO of Baylor Medical Systems), and Arch Bonnema (president of Joshua Financial).



The unusual object is perched on a slope 13,120 feet above sea level. After studying the discovery site, Bonnema observed, “These beams not only look like petrified wood, they are so impressive that they look like real wood—this is an amazing discovery that may be the oldest shipwreck in recorded history.”



Reg Lyle, oil and gas geologist said “the object appears to be a basalt dike, however, it is absolutely uncanny that the object looks like hand hewn timbers, even the grain and color look just like petrified wood….I really need to keep an open mind about this.”



The team returned to the U.S. from rugged mountains in Iran with astonishing video footage of a monstrous black formation which looks like rock but bears the amazing image of hundreds of massive, wooden, hand-hewn beams. Could it be the lost ark on which two of every animal once sailed with their human rescuer?



Bob Cornuke, president of the BASE Institute, is a veteran of nearly 30 expeditions looking for yet-to-be-discovered locations and artifacts described by the Bible. He is cautiously—but enthusiastically—optimistic about the find: “We have no way of confirming for sure that this object is Noah’s Ark, but it is probably the most interesting and baffling object ever found by ark searchers...it sure gets my heart to pumping just thinking of what it could be.”



The arkish object is about 400 feet long and consists of rocks that look remarkably like blackened wood beams while other rock in the area is distinctively brown. And one visible piece is “cut” at 90-degree angle. Even more intriguing, some of the wood-like rocks were tested just this week and actually proved to be petrified wood, and it is noteworthy that Scripture recounts Noah sealed his ark with pitch—a decidedly black substance. Upon being cut open, one of these “rocks” also divulged a marine fossil that could have only originated undersea.



Scouring the mountains all around the object, team participant Steve Crampton found thousands of fossilized sea shells blanketing the landscape. Cornuke brought back a one inch thick rock slab choked with fossilized clams.



High above the ark suspect, the team also found wood splinters and broken pottery shards under snow and rock at the 15,300 foot level. It showed evidence that ancients had thought this an important worship site for hundreds—if not thousands—of years. The landing location would also be an unusually hospitable place to live. The team notes that every ecosystem helpful to humans and the animals is reachable within a 25-mile radius of the ark’s location.



Cornuke initially got involved in the search for the ark after meeting Apollo 15, moon walking astronaut Jim Irwin. In the 1980s Cornuke participated with Irwin in several searches on Mount Ararat in Turkey but was disappointed with the results. After several years of frustrating expeditions, Cornuke started looking elsewhere for the ark.



Cornuke found clues in the Bible that the ark might be on a mountain other than the famed Mount Ararat of Turkey. His observation was based on the Genesis 11 account that says descendants of Noah came to the Mesopotamian valley from the east. According to Cornuke, that would put the Biblical mountains of Ararat somewhere in the northern reaches of Iran. He also cited ancient historians such as Nicholas of Damascus and Flavius Josephus who wrote just before and after Christ that timbers of the ark had survived in what would today be the higher mountains of Iran.



Although his research is by far the most definitive ever, Dr. Cornuke is not the first to suggest Noah’s Ark came to rest in Iran rather than Turkey. In 1943 an army observer named Ed Davis said he saw the ark on a high mountain in Iran. Sergeant Davis was a road construction engineer in Iran during World War II, building army highways from the Persian Gulf to the Caspian Sea. During his tour of duty there, some Iranian friends told Davis of the ark and led him to the site. After the war, Sgt. Davis passed a lie detector test affirming his testimony about actually seeing timbers from an ark-like object high in the mountains of Iran.



Before his death, Davis became acquainted with Bob Cornuke and gave him a map showing the way to the object. “It was right where Ed said it was in his map,” Cornuke relayed, “After seeing it from a distance I thought it at first unimpressive, but once we stood on the object we were all amazed at how it looked just like a huge pile of black and brown stone beams.”



Mary Irwin, wife of late Apollo 15 astronaut Jim Irwin, viewed the evidence and stated that it was “compelling and certainly could be the actual Ark of Noah.”



Many Christians will be eager to see the pictures and video footage, and hear the Biblical evidence for why Noah’s Ark and the mountains of Ararat must be in Iran. Unfortunately, I also expect that Dr. Cornuke will be venomously attacked by both Christians and non-Christians. His discovery will greatly distress evolutionists who do not want the story of Noah and a worldwide flood to be verified. And many Christians that have spent years and millions of dollars searching on Mt. Ararat in Turkey will be quick to dismiss Cornuke’s discovery out of jealousy (and perhaps a bit of embarrassment that they spent so much time looking in the wrong place).



Dr. Cornuke has used the Bible as his primary guidebook to one Biblical location and artifact after another. Has he once again overcome huge odds to make what is arguably one of the greatest archeological discoveries of all time? Has this crime-scene-investigator-turned-explorer pieced together clues from years of examination and discovered the remains of Noah’s Ark?



Some of America’s leading businessmen, an attorney who has argued several cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, and two leading apologists believed the evidence was compelling enough that they made a daring trip to the politically volatile state of Iran and climbed a harsh mountain to see the object firsthand. Now that they’ve returned, they seem anything but disappointed. Elvis may have long since left the building, but it looks as if the Ark may have just appeared at the door.

Excellent!

Here's hoping a reputable peer reviewed scientific publication is made, complete with dating analysis, etc. to make the case.

Baloney. Very disappointing to read this. Absolutely not true. Contrary to what many claim, evolutionists embrace the scientific process. Any verified scientific contradiction to evolution or portions thereof will be embraced. It has to.

Verification of a worldwide flood as the story goes would certainly lead to great scientific accolades - if not a Nobel Prize. I look forward to reading more.

WAT

Agreed WAT. But not all on that side of the fence will be happy. On both sides of the fence, there are those that have an agenda!

In His arms.

Wow, doesn't that just give ya goosebumps! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Like with faith - science is happy-neutral. Just the facts, M'am. Just the cold hard facts.

The right way to go about verifying such a claimed discovery is to open up the facts and evidence to unbiased, neutral reviewers.

WAT

Again...agreed. As unbiased as one can be.

In His arms.

Why yes it does!! While my faith and hope is that I get to see that the real Ark is found, I will await the scientific, historic, biblical, etc communities to weigh in. even the guy who found it stated that it is too early to tell, as much scientific work is yet to be done on the site.

But yes Weaver...goosebumps do exist here!!

In His arms.

Yo MM - this is a quote from one of the guys on the expedition:

His minor premise-major conclusion logic aside, I wonder why he feels compelled to "prove" God existed? Prove to whom? Himself? Others? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" />

Very scary stuff. Proving God. Very scary.

Thoughts?

WAT

Not to pour cold water into anyone's soup, but even if we were to discover Noah's ark on a mountain in Iran, this would not conclusively prove a world-wide flood, just one in the Middle East.

Regards,
rs0522

Scary? Why? If God is real, then we can find evidence of Him. And if we find evidence of Him...then those that deny Him are without excuse. So why not prove His existence?

I dotn find it scary at all. of course, since I know Him personally, I may be biased in the "scared" area!

In His arms.

Maybe. But finding Noah's Ark again pushes the veracity of the Bible's historical accountings back a little further into history. It continues to allow for the possibility of a world wide flood, as the evidence on a 13,000 foot mountain may attest to.

As I said, not one part of the Bible has been proven wrong. Thus, if this ship is Noah's Ark, and it is the size stated in the Bible, and it did carry all of these animals, and it did land on a mountain where the Bible said it was...then it is just one more piece of evidence.

You see, as a former Army inspector general, we did tons of investigations. Unlike the JAG lawyers, we did not need "beyond a reasonable doubt" to prove something. All we needed was the "proponderence of the evidence."

While I am not a scientist (well a political scientist...but thats different), I do understand what the guy was talking about in proving God exists. And so far, the book that is attributed to God has, by the proponderence of the evidence...to be accurate. And a Man that walked the Earth, who said that this book was God's word...and also said that He Himself was God...is known to have said these things.

So, we get back to the question again? Who do you say that I am? How much evidence is enough? Do you need the smoking gun? Or will the continued expanding of the evidence one day lead you to the conclusion that Jesus is who He said He was...and the Bible is the Word of God.

Again, I do nto have the answers on carbon dating or any of this stuff discussed here. It is why I have read it with great interest!! But I do know the history of the Bible, and the history of those that have tried to prove or disprove its events.

And so far, the Bible is batting 1000!!

The proponderence of the evidence leads me to believe that these events did happen. That a world wide flood did happen. We may have found Noah's Ark 13,000 feet up in Iran, with evidence of sea creatures and the like. Just one more step.

In His arms.

Well, a flood in the Middle East, at least.

Of course, we haven't actually seen that the ark is really discovered yet.

Evidence, certainly. I wouldn't say "more", as we haven't seen "any", yet.


Well, not exactly.

Would you like to address the differences between Mark 15:25 and John 19:14? Mark says Jesus was crucified about 9:00am. John says it was "about the sixth hour" (noon-ish), and He still was on trial.

Or, since we are talking creationism, the differences between the creation story in Genesis 1 and the one in Genesis 2.

Regards,
rs0522

What are the differences in creation story 1 and 2? (I have never heard this before.)

:::::anyname -

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Evolution is the process of genetic change over time. It necessarily happened only after things with genetic sequences (‘life’) was there to begin with. Evolution does not explain how ‘life’ got here originally.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


::::This is Evolution 101 - but it's a popular misconception that evolution reaches back to life origins. That's an entirely different topic.

:::::For reasons I don't understand, this seems to really upset some creationists and be the genesis (pun intended) of ridicule from them that "Darwinists" are avoiding questions about failings in their darling "theory."

::::::Nope. Just another topic. There's a whole bunch of scientists that study the chemistry and physics of life origins. Very different from biology. And circling back to the top of this post - creation is NOT disqualified from consideration by many folks In The Beginning.

**Wow**, Worthatry, Last nite I a ran the above quote (from Smur) past my son as I am not a well educated person - and he is one of those scary young scientists at the cutting edge - he kinda said he didn't know where to start to explain to me how small the view (as quoted) was. He launched into a discussion about evolution encompassing chemistry and physics and much more than just biology. He lost me at that point. There was nothing I could down load (from his excited babble) on to my hard disk (aging brain) to reply to Smur - so I asked Smur to elaborate in an attempt to dumb it down enough for me to keep up. I was interested to see that you replied with much the same answer as my son did - only less wordy.

MEDC, I would never presume to tell you not to post to any thread - I am not a believer in threadjacking. All's fair in love and war and internet forum's IMO. What I had hoped to see from you was more along the lines of what you have already done to some degree. That is; reasoned responses, rather than name calling. I see little point in unpleasantness when there is so much of importance to discuss/debate. In reality we are very privileged to have Alan's input and as I more or less said earlier I would not have invited Alan to join a discussion of dumb as_ses. I invited him because the discussions were of a high quality, and because I considered FH's well enough informed to be able to appreciate some one of Alan's perspectives - even if they are on opposite sides of the debate. What's the use of debating with people who know nothing? As Jehovah's Witnesses we were made sit there (for years) and listen to one side only. From that I learned that it's best to hear other opinions - tunnel vision leads to incredible ignorance.

AN

AN... thanks for the reply. I called Alan little man because he refused to say why he was here. You didn't say you invited him until later (and if you did I missed it). And frankly... any person that wants to come on here with the attitude that he has displayed (and An if you don't see it that is only because you are very anti religion due to your experience with the JW's) deserved to be knocked down a rung or two on his perch.
Alan seems to express that his views are the correct ones. Just because he says that the response to his insulting assessments about Christ were inaccurate does not make them so. There are people in this world a lot brighter than Alan who may not own 4000 books...and yet believe in God and creation. I do not feel lucky to have him here due to his disrespectful tone and approach to this entire topic....frankly AN, and I have always appreciated your posts... but I feel you brought what you consider to be a "ringer" to this discussion to further your agenda against religion. That is my opinion.
There are other things that lead to incredible ignorance too... such as placing a bit too much credibility in someone that has spent their life in academic pursuits... hiding behind university walls while becoming oh so brilliant.... or placing too much emphasis on ones own experience in a cult and using that to fuel an agenda in a disrespectful fashion. JMHO.

AN -
Sorry to say, he's wrong.

In evolutionary theory it is taken as axiomatic that an original self-replicating life form existed in the distant past, regardless of its origin. All scientific theories have their respective, specific explanatory domains; no scientific theory proposes to explain everything. Quantum mechanics does not explain the ultimate origin of particles and energy, even though nothing in that theory could work without particles and energy. Neither Newton's theory of universal gravitation nor the general theory of relativity attempt to explain the origin of matter or gravity, even though both theories would be meaningless without the a priori existence of gravity and matter. Similarly, universal common descent is restricted to the biological patterns found in the Earth's biota; it does not attempt to explain the ultimate origin of life.

WAT

MM -

Just as I thought - to influence others.

Why do you feel compelled to prove his existance to others? If he's real to you, isn't that enough? Why are you bothered that others may not agree?

WAT

To follow up on what I said, here are the specific links to Dr. Harley's thoughts on selfish demands, disrespectful judgments, and angry outbursts. They are a good basis for civil discourse, among other things.

Speaking with disrespect and anger is, in my overall framework, directly related to your own core hurts. Here are some summary quotes from Steven Stosny's site, www.compassionpower.com (I am not associated with him or his site.)

"Because the brain is a better-safe-than-sorry system, developed when all predators were bigger and faster than us, it would rather blow up a hundred times mistaking your spouse for a saber tooth tiger than make the mistake once of thinking a saber-tooth tiger was your spouse and getting eaten. That’s why living in the anger file is dangerous. You can wind up hitting people without a moment’s hesitation and deeply regretting it."

Hitting people verbally is the same kind of thing.

Going further, "To change within you must identify and understand what core hurts you are feeling: disregarded/unimportant, accused (guilty, untrustworthy or mistrusted), devalued, rejected, powerless, or unlovable. When we feel those we often feel helpless, we become dependant, try to force or manipulate others into helping us, get depressed because their help is never enough, and become destructive to ourselves and/or others. These are the Weak Modes of self, although destructive mode feels like power when you are in it. Anger and other destructive acts will give you a momentary sense of power, followed by depression and defensiveness."

When you know you're right, and someone else is stubbornly, boneheadedly refusing to see the rightness of your position, it is very likely that you'll start to feel helpless. "How can I get through to this idiot?" you might think. And then you'll start to feel inadequate. "Geez, why isn't he getting it?? My explanation should've been completely clear!" And then you get angry. "What a moron!! She's being purposely obtuse. I'm gonna let her have it."

One last reference, for those who prefer books to other forms of learning. The Dalai Lama's Ethics for a New Millenium is one of the best books about compassion that I know of. It is also one of the most complex. I recommend it heartily. I also recommend, for a more human side-companion to that scholarly work, The Wisdom of Forgiveness by the Dalai Lama and Victor Chan. The latter is a series of discussions between the two men, and is most noteworthy for the Dalai Lama's discussion of the necessity of forgiving the people who overran and took over his country, with a violence that has not ended. I use it as a reference point of all of the small acts of violence that I have perceived myself to be the victim of. If he can forgive that, surely I can understand forgiveness enough to forgive this, I think.

The verbal violence of these conversations, the bickering and snarling back and forth, are the beginning of a descending cycle that can lead to some of the darkest parts of human existence. I recommend avoiding it.

Am I feeling bothered?

In His arms.