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.

http://www.worldviewweekend.com/secu...&ArticleID=813

I remember hearing about this back in the 70s. Is this Mt. Ararat?

I saw that on "In Search of..." w/ Leonard Nimoy, or was that not the "real" ark?

No... these are mountains in northern Iraq north of Tehran. They are part of the "mountains of Ararat" chain in that area.

Yeah, that's it. I remember seeing something about this in the 70s. I wonder what takes them so long to find out if it's really the ark or not?

I think a lot of it was the governments at the time... the Turks and the Iranians have not been too friendly with allowing research on these mountains.

"The arkish object is about 400 feet long..."

Now, I could maybe understand how Christians would believe that finding both genders of every single species on our planet might have been possible with "divine intervention"; but anyone with a logic ability of a two year old can put a circle block in a circle hole and come to the conclusion that it is impossibile to fit all of those species in a 400 foot-long wooden vessel. God would have had to miniature-size all the species many many times over again. The fact that there are people that believe this makes me embarrassed to be a part of the human race.

This is interesting.

http://tinyurl.com/b33ju

"Christiananswers.net" isn't exactly a source which you could call reliable in scientific means. It claims that "when all the facts are examined that there is no scientific evidence that the biblical account of Noah's ark is a myth or fable"; and then ends the very same article with "Now, Christ is calling unto the world to once again have faith in God. Will you answer His calling and be saved from future judgment?". I'm not the one to be complaining that people have agendas, but this is just too obvious.

You conveniently omitted in your reply what the article says between the beginning and the end. How convenient for you. What part of the explanation did you have trouble with besides the references to Christ at the end. I will omit those in the future so you don't get hung up on it. I usually avoid hang ups and respond to the facts, but I see that you don't.