ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags crypto-archaeology , Noah's Ark

Reply
Old 27th April 2010, 04:21 PM   #41
rjh01
Gentleman of leisure
Tagger
 
rjh01's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Flying around in the sky
Posts: 23,907
Another thread on the same topic http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=174196
rjh01 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 04:23 PM   #42
rjh01
Gentleman of leisure
Tagger
 
rjh01's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Flying around in the sky
Posts: 23,907
Another thread on the same topic here http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=174159
rjh01 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 04:33 PM   #43
Monketi Ghost
Confusion Reactor
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 25,141
"Liars for Noah"?
Monketi Ghost is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 04:51 PM   #44
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by dogjones View Post
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/...turkey-arafat/


This is the dumbest news story I've seen in a while.



Classic. Any bets on what the structure actually is?

DJ
Madouc started a thread on this in History earlier yesterday. We Hong Kong skeptics (all both of us) are all over this. The full article is available on that thread (I've asked the mods to merge the two).
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 05:01 PM   #45
Madouc
Scholar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 110
This is the same evangelical group that built this: http://www.noahsark.com.hk/eng/index.php

An 'educational' centre and hotel in HK in the form of an enormous replica of Noah's Ark.

I'm pretty sure one of the writers of the original article, Joyce Ng, is a girl I know through a mutual friend. Apparently they visited the Natural History Museum in London together, looked over the magnificence of the dinosaur exhibit, only to have Joyce comment: "Yeah the fossils look great. Too bad they're all fake. Yeah, they were all just planted there to fool people."
Madouc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 05:47 PM   #46
Nursedan
Critical Thinker
 
Nursedan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 490
Noah's Ark found?

This fits in well here : http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...in-Turkey.html

What do you all think? Seems a little lacking in the details - a more full picture might come about if the object was excavated properly. Also, the story says these are "evangelical archaeologists", so a little confirmation bias maybe?
Nursedan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 06:32 PM   #47
Brainache
Nasty Brutish and Tall
 
Brainache's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Canberra
Posts: 17,026
I don't believe in the story of Noah's Ark, but I would be very interested to see what a properly funded archeological investigation could find out about this.

I wouldn't be surprised to learn that it is some kind of modern hoax. It wouldn't be the first time some wacky fundamentalists lied to get publicity.
Brainache is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 06:38 PM   #48
Complexity
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 9,242
Of course they didn't find "Noah's Ark".

This will distract some of them for quite a while.

If it wouldn't hurt the animals, I'd love to pick a few fundies, put them in first, stuff in as many pairs of animals "of each kind", enough food and water, and then cork it up for the requisite period of time.

I don't think the fundies, if they survived, would be fundies any longer.
Complexity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 06:40 PM   #49
MG1962
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,252
I always thoought if they found something up there it would be more likely to be some sort of temple dedicated to Noah....oddly enough in the shape of an ark
MG1962 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 06:44 PM   #50
Brainache
Nasty Brutish and Tall
 
Brainache's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Canberra
Posts: 17,026
Originally Posted by MG1962 View Post
I always thoought if they found something up there it would be more likely to be some sort of temple dedicated to Noah....oddly enough in the shape of an ark
What shape is an ark? Is it just a box, like the ark of the covenant?
Brainache is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 06:46 PM   #51
Complexity
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 9,242
The 'ark' was in the shape of a flying saucer, of course.

Ancient Astronauts, you know.

(No point in not combining woo, like arranging flowers, for fun and profit.)
Complexity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 06:46 PM   #52
Robo Sapien
 
Robo Sapien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 536
Well that's just great, we'll never hear the end of it now. Of course there are many possible explanations, none of which will be heard by the Christian world. Perhaps there really was a guy named Noah who really did build an ark, for what reason is purely speculative. In any case, this is a great discovery and I can't wait to see what we learn from it.
__________________
This public service announcement brought to you by the Department of Redundancy Department.
Robo Sapien is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 06:53 PM   #53
Robo Sapien
 
Robo Sapien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 536
Originally Posted by MG1962 View Post
I always thoought if they found something up there it would be more likely to be some sort of temple dedicated to Noah....oddly enough in the shape of an ark

Not sure about the temple idea, the carbon dating on that thing makes it almost 3000 years older than the Bible itself. Although it is possible the creator of the ark was canonized as a hero of sorts, and that his legend influenced the writing of the scriptures.
__________________
This public service announcement brought to you by the Department of Redundancy Department.
Robo Sapien is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 06:55 PM   #54
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 69,122
Duplicate thread.

The age old dilemma, does it go in the science forum or the religion forum?
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 07:00 PM   #55
Complexity
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 9,242
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Duplicate thread.

The age old dilemma, does it go in the science forum or the religion forum?

Conspiracy forum, of course.
Complexity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 07:03 PM   #56
MattTheTubaGuy
Critical Thinker
 
MattTheTubaGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 261
I think that after the flood, and Noah and his family left the Ark, they would have used the wood in the boat to build stuff, so there wouldn't be an ark or remains of an ark to find, just some wooden houses if they were lucky enough to survive several thousand years.
MattTheTubaGuy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 07:04 PM   #57
JohnG
Pedantic Bore
 
JohnG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Abandon All Hope
Posts: 6,786
Quote:
Noah's Ark found?

Again?
__________________
Do not weep. Do not wax indignant. Understand. - Baruch Spinoza
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. - Harlan Ellison
JohnG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 07:08 PM   #58
MG1962
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,252
Originally Posted by Robo Sapien View Post
Not sure about the temple idea, the carbon dating on that thing makes it almost 3000 years older than the Bible itself. Although it is possible the creator of the ark was canonized as a hero of sorts, and that his legend influenced the writing of the scriptures.
True and that is a real possibility - However I would like to see some independent measurements of the wood first before accepting that date
MG1962 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 07:12 PM   #59
halohms
Thinker
 
halohms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 130
Knock, knock, Noah, are you in there?

I would have expected to see a whole lot of animal dung.

Hoax
halohms is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 07:13 PM   #60
MG1962
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,252
Originally Posted by Brainache View Post
What shape is an ark? Is it just a box, like the ark of the covenant?
Yes only heaps bigger - and potentially less dangerous to carry around


Genesis 6:15 in the Bible tells us the Ark's dimensions were at least 135 meters long (300 cubits), 22.5 meters wide (50 cubits), and 13.5 meters high (30 cubits). That's 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high
MG1962 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 07:45 PM   #61
Madouc
Scholar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 110
From the Press Conference:

Quote:
1. One of the spaces discovered is frozen by ice. Under ice is wood with wood beam above. There is tenon construction on the wall and it is obvious artificial structure.


2. The space witnessed by Panda Lee is L-shaped. This is the first discovered space. Its L-shaped and its features match well with some spaces discovered later, like tenon construction. We concluded that it was originally a box-shaped room and heavily decomposed.


3. This space stands at more than 5 metres high. Team members had to get through a broken opening and abseil down to get inside. All walls are wood and the space is not box-shaped. Strictly speaking, the walls are not vertical but rather curved and inclined. The small door on one side, of dimensions one meter high and half meter width, presumably leads to another space but our team did not risk going further due to the lack of oxygen.


4. This room is box-shaped, having a dimension of height, width and length of more than two metres. There is a wooden beam with wooden nails on one side of the wall. It is believed that a rope was hooked on these nails to keep animals in place. On another side of the wall, there are racks.


5. A very small tunnel-like space connects two spaces.


6. A few wooden staircases were found inside the structure, which seemingly craved by tree logs. Our team climbed one and found a door in the ceiling and concluded the wood structure has more than one floor. We tried to open it but failed. Since we did not want to destroy the structure, we will try again with appropriate equipment in the future.


7. The team has not entered this space. They viewed and took shots from a small opening above. The height and width are estimated to be 5 metres and 12 metres respectively.
So nothing to suggest that the structure is a boat, other than the walls seem a bit inclined.

I watched the last two videos from the website - the "Ararat Expedition" clip is just dramatic music playing over a 'hiking on snowy mountain' montage, while the "Wooden Structure" clip has the researchers entering the space and knocking on the sides saying "this is wood". Which is apparently all that's required to establish that it's the Ark of legend.

The saddest thing is, this might actually have been quite an interesting find if it were in the hands of competent archaeologists.
Madouc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 07:45 PM   #62
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 38,828
I'm still trying to get any names I can from friends who might know some of the brass at the South China Morning Post, as I want to give 'em a piece of my mind, just for the satisfaction of so doing.

But, MSNBC has picked up on it and ran a critical story (the comments are great... 90% are "You Atheists Better Fear Gawd" screeds), so I imagine the evil MSM will pick up on it.

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archi...aspx?GT1=43001
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 07:50 PM   #63
Schrodinger's Cat
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 3,456
Originally Posted by KingMerv00 View Post
That's particularly stupid since carbon dating is rarely used to date on an evolutionary timescale.



I say we give the guy points for believing in carbon dating. I doubt he extends the same logic to Potassium-Argon dating, though.
yes but it is used on a lot of archaeological sites of human activities, some of which have been found to be older than 6,000 years, thus going against the creationist story. I think that's why they go after it so much. But I also think a lot of them mistakenly think it's used to date the fossil record as well.

Last edited by Schrodinger's Cat; 27th April 2010 at 08:02 PM.
Schrodinger's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 07:52 PM   #64
Nursedan
Critical Thinker
 
Nursedan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 490
Well, it'll be interesting to see how this plays out. It was apparently found atop Mt. Ararat, which is the place people have speculated it would have been found.

It's interesting that some replies to this thread haven't been skeptical, but dismissive. In other words, yes, this probably isn't "Noah's Ark", but it could be. I disagree with religion too, but that doesn't preclude the chance that this could be legit. Denouncing this find because you already don't believe the bible is, to me, not "skepticism".

Sorry for the duplicate thread, but man - that is interesting - does it go in science or religion...? I was going the biblical route myself.

Last edited by Nursedan; 27th April 2010 at 07:55 PM.
Nursedan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 08:01 PM   #65
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,635
Originally Posted by Nursedan View Post
It's interesting that some replies to this thread haven't been skeptical, but dismissive. In other words, yes, this probably isn't "Noah's Ark", but it could be. I disagree with religion too, but that doesn't preclude the chance that this could be legit. Denouncing this find because you already don't believe the bible is, to me, not "skepticism".
Au contraire. That's like saying dismissing the newly discovered remains of a hut near the North Pole as Santa's workshop isn't being skeptical. As their is no evidence for the original idea, there is no necessity or value in entertaining the follow-on claim.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 08:05 PM   #66
Verde
Muse
 
Verde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Where the jackalopes roam.
Posts: 817
thesun.co.uk

Consider the source. The Sun has the credibility of the Weakly Whirled Newts.

Except for the interesting Pg.3 pictures.

V.
__________________
It makes sense, if you don't think about it. - T-Mobile ad
You're innocent when you dream. - Tom Waits
Religion was invented when the first con man met the first fool. - Samuel Clemens
Verde is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 08:06 PM   #67
Robo Sapien
 
Robo Sapien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 536
Originally Posted by MG1962 View Post
True and that is a real possibility - However I would like to see some independent measurements of the wood first before accepting that date

Good point, lets not take the "Evangelistic Archeologists" findings at face value. Come to think of it, I'm a little skeptical of a wooden artifact being preserved for that long, despite being trapped in ice. I'm not sure if the temperatures there are low enough to prevent decay.

Really, people have been "positive" that they found the Ark on that mountain since the 70's. Mt Ararat is mentioned in the Bible, so no doubt many eyes have been on it.

A little research turned up an incident in 1991 where some archeologists investigating the mountain were kidnapped by Kurdish rebels, right about the same time the Turkish government restricted public access to the area. Not to sound like a CT nut, but it kind of makes you wonder what is being hidden.
__________________
This public service announcement brought to you by the Department of Redundancy Department.
Robo Sapien is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 08:11 PM   #68
Complexity
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 9,242
Originally Posted by Nursedan View Post
It's interesting that some replies to this thread haven't been skeptical, but dismissive. In other words, yes, this probably isn't "Noah's Ark", but it could be. I disagree with religion too, but that doesn't preclude the chance that this could be legit. Denouncing this find because you already don't believe the bible is, to me, not "skepticism".

Nonsense.

It is suspect first because evangelical xian 'archeologists' found it. I have yet to meet a fundie that wouldn't lie, cheat, and steal to support their 'faith'.

bibble 'flood' didn't happen - no world-covering flood - so the story in the bibble is necessary false.

If someone named noah built a boat and took his family and pets on vacation, that I could believe (though none of the story in the bibble).

That his joyboat ended up on top of a mountain, that I don't believe.

If that structure is real, it was probably put up by a guy trying to get away from his wife, probably to hook up with his boyfriend.

Last edited by Complexity; 27th April 2010 at 08:13 PM.
Complexity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 08:14 PM   #69
Nursedan
Critical Thinker
 
Nursedan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 490
Originally Posted by Garrette View Post
Au contraire. That's like saying dismissing the newly discovered remains of a hut near the North Pole as Santa's workshop isn't being skeptical. As their is no evidence for the original idea, there is no necessity or value in entertaining the follow-on claim.
Right, but my point was that there isn't "no evidence". How do you know there is no evidence? Wooden beams resembling an ancient structure were found atop a mountain where people have thought for many years that Noah's Ark had been. The fact that this was found is evidence - it would be an opinion as to whether it were 'good' evidence or not.

Gosh, I sound like I'm making a case for the archaeologist's find here . Show me some irrefutable evidence, like independent carbon dating coupled with the DNA of several different kinds of animals, and now we're talking!
Nursedan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 08:15 PM   #70
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by Moon-Spinner View Post
All the while I was reading this story, I kept thinking "I wonder if any REAL scientist will investigate it?" Everybody involved seems to be a creationist, and/or already prone to believing in the Ark's reality.
You mean because it was sponsored by The Noah's Ark Ministries, and a company in Hong Kong that is promoting a not-so-cleverly disguised fundie Christian theme park?

http://www.noahsark.com.hk/eng/visit2.php

Methinks they avoid mentioning the Big Skydaddy or J.C. there because they're hyping this park to Chinese tourists and they wouldn't get much play if they went all Bible-riffic on the site. But I'm willing to bet that the story of this expedition shows up in the big multi-media presentation there, soon, since that attraction is run by the same folks, Media Evangilism.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 08:16 PM   #71
Nursedan
Critical Thinker
 
Nursedan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 490
Originally Posted by Complexity View Post
Nonsense.

It is suspect first because evangelical xian 'archeologists' found it. I have yet to meet a fundie that wouldn't lie, cheat, and steal to support their 'faith'.

bibble 'flood' didn't happen - no world-covering flood - so the story in the bibble is necessary false.

If someone named noah built a boat and took his family and pets on vacation, that I could believe (though none of the story in the bibble).

That his joyboat ended up on top of a mountain, that I don't believe.

If that structure is real, it was probably put up by a guy trying to get away from his wife, probably to hook up with his boyfriend.
So are you saying there is no way to convince you that this is actually Noah's Ark? If so, my post is valid.

Chalk this up to inexperience, but what's a fundie?
Nursedan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 08:20 PM   #72
steve s
Philosopher
 
steve s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,865
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Here's a couple more images. I'm wagering on total fake, lying for Jesus profit until i see more evidence they actually found anything.

Does anyone know what that rock formation is called? Years ago I read an explanation about this type of formation. I recall that they mentioned that there are others in the area. Must have been a flotilla of arks.

Steve S
__________________
"Nature abhors a moron." -- H. L. Mencken
steve s is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 08:21 PM   #73
Complexity
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 9,242
Originally Posted by Nursedan View Post
Chalk this up to inexperience, but what's a fundie?

Get a mirror.
Complexity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 08:22 PM   #74
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by Schrodinger's Cat View Post
One of the biggest arguments I hear against evolution is that "carbon dating is completely inacurate and unreliably."

Apparently, unless they believe it supports their position.

How big is the structure they found? Big enough to hold two of every animal in the world and to keep all the carnivores in their own individual separate compartments so they could not eat the other animals? And of course teeny little compartments that would hold each species of insect, also individually, so they would not eat eachother?
The Fundies are taking this argument up to Legendary Strawman Status. Their (ahem) logic is something like this:
Oh, so you support carbon dating when it "proves" that the earth is older than 6600 years, huh? How conveeeenient! But when it PROVES THE WORD OF THE BIBLE, you want to dismiss it! Hypocrites!


Yes, I think it's already a meme being promoted somewhere because in the over 2000 commments to a critical MSNBC article, it gets repeated over and over, regardless that no one has questioned the accuracy of carbon dating. They're questioning why they won't show us the lab results or reports of said carbon dating in some sooper sekret Iranian lab.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 08:28 PM   #75
Robo Sapien
 
Robo Sapien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 536
I don't think it is rational to dismiss the idea of an ark, only the biblical account of it. Evidence of settlements have been found in the area, and it could very well be that its inhabitants believed a flood was coming and built huge liveable boats on the mountainside.

I don't believe this is the first "ark" to be found in the region, either.

Oh, and this is a fundie.
__________________
This public service announcement brought to you by the Department of Redundancy Department.
Robo Sapien is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 08:28 PM   #76
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,635
Originally Posted by Nursedan View Post
Right, but my point was that there isn't "no evidence".
My "no evidence" was in reference to "the original idea," i.e., the veracity of the bible itself. The distinction is not trivial.


Originally Posted by Nursedan
How do you know there is no evidence? Wooden beams resembling an ancient structure were found atop a mountain where people have thought for many years that Noah's Ark had been.
And (allegedly) unidentified and unidentifiable remains of (allegedly) unknown creatures have been found in areas where Bigfoot and Chupacabras have been thought to exist. Those remains present exactly zero evidence of Bigfoot or Chupacabras until they are shown to be evidence of Bigfoot or Chupacabras.


Originally Posted by Nursedan
The fact that this was found is evidence
Yes. It is evidence that something was found. It is not, in even the remotest sense except that of wishful thinking, evidence of Noah's Ark. If in two months it is solidly proven that this actually is the remains of Noah's Ark, this original stance would still not be invalid. It is evidence when it is evidence; it is proof when it is proof. Right now it is simply a finding. Your thinking is identical to those who cite "spooky action at a distance" as evidence of clairvoyance.

Originally Posted by Nursedan
- it would be an opinion as to whether it were 'good' evidence or not.
Not all opinions are equal.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 08:30 PM   #77
Nursedan
Critical Thinker
 
Nursedan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 490
Originally Posted by Complexity View Post
Get a mirror.
So you're one of those "axe to grind" atheists, huh?

As I said - have you made your mind up already, or would there be any way to convince you that this is Noah's Ark?

Last edited by Nursedan; 27th April 2010 at 08:34 PM.
Nursedan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 08:37 PM   #78
Nursedan
Critical Thinker
 
Nursedan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 490
Originally Posted by Robo Sapien View Post
In any case, this is a great discovery and I can't wait to see what we learn from it.
This, I can appreciate.
Nursedan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 08:48 PM   #79
Complexity
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 9,242
Originally Posted by Nursedan View Post
So you're one of those "axe to grind" atheists, huh?

I value truth and justice over superstition, which I regard as the enemy of mankind.

So sue me.
Complexity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2010, 09:18 PM   #80
Mel Odious
NWO Public Relations Dept.
 
Mel Odious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 587
Originally Posted by RossFW View Post
Apparently the wood has been dated as 4800 yrs old using Carbon Dating!!

Now, hasn't Carbon Dating and other means of radio-metric dating made certain fundamentalist beliefs look a little, well, implausible?
Should I understand this to mean that according to the carbon dating, the ark was built 4800 years ago?

If so, there's a problem. That means the ark was built around 2800 BC. But according to Biblical chronology, the flood happened around 500 years later, somewhere around 2300 BC (I'm going from memory here). That would mean the carbon dating of the wood actually is evidence against their claim.
__________________
"Fantasy-based people can invent new crap faster than fact-based people can debunk it." - BigAl

"Even if you're arguing with an ideological brick wall, you might be in listening range of someone who still has the ability to think. Give it a shot." - jasonpatterson
Mel Odious is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:03 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.