Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site psivax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!mtuxo!mtunh!mtung!mtunf!ariel!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen
From: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: The Scientific Case for Creation: (Part 46)
Message-ID: <558@psivax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 11-Jul-85 21:47:43 EDT
Article-I.D.: psivax.558
Posted: Thu Jul 11 21:47:43 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 17-Jul-85 20:30:32 EDT
References: <404@iham1.UUCP>
Reply-To: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Distribution: net
Organization: Pacesetter Systems Inc., Sylmar, CA
Lines: 78
Summary: 

In article <404@iham1.UUCP> rck@iham1.UUCP (Ron Kukuk) writes:
>
>     THE SCIENTIFIC CASE FOR CREATION: 116 CATEGORIES OF EVIDENCE
>
>III. (Earth Sciences): THE EARTH HAS EXPERIENCED A WORLDWIDE FLOOD.
>
>    A.  ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE INDICATES  THAT  NOAH'S  ARK  PROBABLY
>        EXISTS [a-g].
>
>       88.  Ancient historians  such  as  Josephus,  the  Jewish-Roman
>            historian, and Berosus of the Chaldeans mentioned in their
>            writings that the Ark existed.   Marco  Polo  also  stated
>            that  the  Ark was reported to be on a mountain in greater
>            Armenia.
>
>       89.  In  about  1856,  a  team  of  three   skeptical   British
>            scientists  and  two  Armenian guides climbed to Ararat to
>            demonstrate that the  Ark  did  not  exist.  The  Ark  was
>            supposedly found, but the British scientists threatened to
>            kill the guides if they reported it.
>
>       90.  Sir James Bryce, a noted British scholar and  traveler  of
>            the  mid-nineteenth  century,  conducted extensive library
>            research concerning the Ark. He became convinced that  the
>            Ark  was  preserved  on Mount Ararat.
>
>       91.  In 1883, a series of newspaper articles  reported  that  a
>            team   of   Turkish   commissioners,  while  investigating
>            avalanche conditions on Mount  Ararat,  unexpectedly  came
>            upon  the Ark projecting out of the melting ice at the end
>            of an  unusually  warm  summer.  They  claimed  that  they
>            entered and examined a portion of the Ark.
>
>       92.  In the unusually warm summer of  1902,  an  Armenian  boy,
>            Georgie  Hagopian,  and  his uncle climbed to the Ark that
>            was reportedly sticking  out  of  an  ice  pack.  The  boy
>            climbed  over the Ark and was able to describe it in great
>            detail. In 1904 Hagopian visited  the  Ark  for  a  second
>            time.
>
>       93.  A Russian pilot, flying over Ararat in World War I (1915),
>            thought  he saw the Ark.
>
>       94.  At about the time of the Russian  sighting,  five  Turkish
>            soldiers, crossing Mount Ararat, claim to have encountered
>            the Ark; however, they did not report their story until 30
>            years  later  when  they  offered  to  guide  an  American
>            expedition  to  the   site.
>
>       95.  During World War II, a group of Russian flyers on at least
>            two  occasions took aerial photographs that showed the Ark
>            protruding out of the ice.
>
>       96.  An oil geologist, George Greene, in 1953 took a number  of
>            photographs  of the Ark from a helicopter.
>
	An interesting collection of anecdotal and circumstantial
"evidence" of no scientific value whatever! Really such partisan
authors as Josephus!(A Jew no less). But as a matter of fact many
ancient historians were veru uncritical of thier sources and generally
included myths and unsubstantiated tales as "facts". Then of course
there are these people who saw the Ark and waited 30 yeaers to tell
someone, and when they did it was for financial gain(being hired as
guides by a gullible foreigner)!! I have seen some of these photos,
they are about as clear and unambiguous as the photos of pyramids
on Mars! Really, none of these accounts is of any value, none would
even be acceptible in a court of law, let alone a serious historical
textbook! What with "lost reports" and distant rumours I see no reason
to take any of this seriously. Especially in the light of recent
expeditions and analyses which have consistantly failed to find the
Ark, and which have shown that the "piece of wood from the Ark" is
in fact no such thing!
-- 

				Sarima (Stanley Friesen)

{trwrb|allegra|cbosgd|hplabs|ihnp4|aero!uscvax!akgua}!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen
or {ttdica|quad1|bellcore|scgvaxd}!psivax!friesen