Today, we have a file stocked full of articles
criticizing both the site and Ron, but we also have a house full
of scientific documentation. Ultimately, the decision is yours. If it's not the ark then what is it?
If you can provide another answer to that question, it is to your loss.
I can say that, too because I live with all the evidence, day after day.
If, as we believe firmly, God preserved the ark as evidence of
the complete accuracy and validity of His Holy Word, then it's
important for you to know the truth so you can make a thoughtful,
informed decision. As Ron says, perhaps God has provided all the
evidence He is going to provide that this is the ark. After all,
Christ stated: Luke 16:31: "If they hear not Moses and the prophets,
neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Understanding the Remains of
The entire key to understanding the evidence which confirms
that this site does in fact contain the remains of Noah's Ark,
is understanding the condition of the remains. The "world" has
a preconceived notion of what they will accept, and that is:
a recognizable wooden ship, (still intact after 4,300 years),
and the ship must be on the volcanic mountain known as Mount
Ararat. The concept of the ark's appearance has been further
enhanced by those who interpreted the fact that the ark had
rooms to mean that it had to look like a barge-shaped houseboat
instead of a ship.
This concept has been based on the many claimed sightings of the
ark on Mount Ararat and not a single sighting is accompanied by any evidence.
The Ark Is Not Barge-Shaped
First of all, a barge-shaped vessel could not survive on the open seas.
Any sailor can tell you that. In fact, the idea is preposterous.
The oil tankers of today which traverse the open seas have a hull
which is not flat on the bottom, but instead is rounded. The wave
action of the stormy seas today cannot compare with the turmoil
of the open seas of the Flood which extended the entire surface
of the earth. If a barge-shaped ship today cannot sail the ocean,
abandon the idea of a barge-shaped ark from your mind. This simply
IS not a possibility.
If you want to research the subject yourself, go to the
library and look up "ships and ship-building" and/or "fluid dynamics"
or "hydrodynamics". The "boat-shaped object" is not barge-shaped.
It displays the shape of a seagoing vessel. Therefore, from the
beginning of its discovery in the stereo-photo, it had this one
feature already in its favor.
The Ark Would Not Have Survived on Mount Ararat
If the ark was a reality, then so was the Flood which destroyed the
entire face of the earth, and this means that the ark (if it has survived
until today) is the oldest structure on earth. Considering the fragile
state of wooden homes that were built even in the last century,
could we expect to find an intact ark, or even any remains at all?
Certainly not in the ever-moving glaciers on Mount. Ararat which
continually flow and grind everything in their path into minute
pieces. Even if an object survived in the glaciers could it
survive the incredible blasts of the past volcanic eruptions, the most
recent of which blew out an entire section of the mountain?
Again, go to the library and research "volcanoes" and "glaciers".
Read up on Mount St. Helens, whose last eruption was similar to
the last eruption which Mt. Ararat experienced, even leaving a
similar blown-out hole in the mountain. You will see the total devastation
suffered by everything on or around the mountain at that time.
In addition to this, the Turkish military has been training
their commandos on Mount Ararat for many years, and they know
every inch of the mountain. They know there is nothing up there.
How Was the Ark Preserved?
The evidence found at the "boat-shaped object" (which we will
in complete confidence refer to as "the ark") shows that the
ark was only preserved at all because it was covered in lava
flow which effectively sealed it in a sort of "time capsule."
However, the mountain it is on is not volcanic. The evidence shows
that the lava resulted from an eruption of a volcano many miles
to the south in present-day Iran.
The lava from that mountain was ejected into the
air and carried to the top of the ridge above the
ark's present location. The existence of this volcano
is proven by the broken stele Ron found in 1984 upon
this ridge which showed the unique limestone ridge with
a volcano positioned next to it to the south. Today,
this volcano is collapsed and cannot be seen except
from the top of the ridge, not from the viewpoint of
the artist who inscribed the stele.
The Ark Covered In Lava
The lava reached the top of the ridge and began to travel
down the side of the mountain, covering the ark. The path
of the lava can be distinctly seen in the present mud-flow
area. One way mud flows are formed is when water is trapped
over a long period of time in the slowly decaying lava.
Then, when the lava finally deteriorates into soil, the
tremendous amount of water captured and retained in it
begins to flow, sometimes quite rapidly and catastrophically.
This is called a mudslide. The weight of this tremendous
amount of molten rock (lava) flowing upon the ark caused the
two top decks to collapse.
If that is so, why wasn't the ark burned up? There are two possibilities
as to why it wasn't burned up. The first is this: assuming the lava
was the type which would have caused a wooden object to catch on fire,
if the ark was completely covered by lava rapidly, this would cut off
the oxygen supply and combustion would not be possible. But, supposing
it was covered more slowly. It is a documented fact that lava does
not always cause combustion.
Either way you choose, the fact that the ark was covered
by lava does not in any way mean that it had to be burned up.
The fact that the decks seem to be uniformly collapsed indicates
that it was covered rapidly, which would have cut off
the oxygen supply. We do have specimens which display
some burning, but it seems to be very limited in extent.
The Ark Revealed when Lava Deteriorated
The lava covered the ark and sealed it in an air-tight "capsule".
So why is it now visible? Why isn't it still encased in the lava?
Because lava deteriorates and breaks down over time into fertile soil.
Let's again go to the same book we referred to above: "The soils which
develop from the decomposition of the lavas, cinders, and ashes are
exceptionally rich in potash, lime and phosphates. Many districts
of the world with a high agricultural population owe the richness of
their land to volcanic material" (page 173).
Hawaii is an excellent example of this. Their wonderful
soil (which produces the beautiful exotic flowers we associate
with this paradise) are a result of the decayed lava, so rich
in the nutrients necessary for perfect growth. But it takes
lava a very long time to deteriorate; how long depends on
the type, etc., and we cannot know exactly how long the ark
was covered. However, over time, as the lava began its
deterioration process, it was no longer air-tight.
The Remains Were Fossilized
The ark is situated on a mountain side and it slopes. The
front end is at about a 6,350 foot elevation while the lower
end is at about the 6,250 foot elevation. The lava deteriorated
over time, and being no longer air-tight, it was no longer water-tight.
The region experiences several months of snow with the accompanying cold
temperatures. In the spring, the snow slowly melts and as it does,
the water flows down the mountainside. This means that as the lava began
to deteriorate, this water began to flow through the material
which covered the ark.
As the water slowly seeped over the preserved structures of
the ark, it began to wash away minute particles of the wood
and metal fittings of the structure. This took place on a
molecular level- molecule by molecule was washed away. But
as each molecule broke loose and washed away with the water,
it left a "hole" the exact size of the molecule that had broken
loose. As the water flowed over the structure some of the
molecules it picked up from materials it had passed over prior
to arriving at the ark lodged in the "molecule holes" left
in the structure. The process I am describing is called
"petrification" or "mineral replacement".
For an object to become petrified, two things are always
required. First the object must be buried rapidly, and secondly
it must have water flowing through it. If it is not air-tight and
has no water flowing over it, it suffers from decay and is not
preserved. The evolutionists will be quick to tell you that
petrification takes millions of years to occur, but this is
a bold-faced lie. If petrification does not occur at least
a srapidly as the decay rate, the object simply decays away.
Petrified - Literally "Turned to Stone"
As the water flowed down the mountain into the soil and then
reached the ark, the structure members nearest the top were
petrified with molecules of the substances in the earth above
the ark, which were minerals. As the water flowed over the
midsection of the ark, it had picked up molecules from the
ark structures it had flowed over prior to reaching the
midsection. Therefore, it began to be petrified with substances
from its own structure in addition to the substances in
the soil above it. At least that is what should have
occurred if the object really is the ark. The evidence
at the site shows that this is exactly what happened.
The deck timber which Ron obtained from the approximate mid-section
of the ship contained over 13% iron - iron which came from the metal
fittings of the structure above mid-section. The majority of molecules
involved in the petrification process are molecules from the natural
substances in the earth and the lava. The first analyses Ron had
performed on his specimens from the site showed an approximate 51%
That's fine. The "Encyclopaedia Brittannica," 1985 ed.,
vol. 19, page 506, (under "volcanoes") states: " Magma
consists of a molten-silicate mass within the earth, of
various composition..." In fact, all petrified objects
contain a great deal of silica simply due to its abundance
in the soil.
The "Sure-Fire Test"
But there is one substance that is not found in natural
minerals, which we will now discuss. As I began to study
the subject of "carbon", which involves the study of
chemistry, I learned
some very interesting facts. Compounds of carbon can
be analyzed to determine whether they are composed of
matter that was non-organic or organic, which means
it can be determined whether they were once living,
matter or not. It's that simple. Therefore, the one
test to determine if an object was organic (once living)
or not is to determine its carbon content, whether it
contains organic carbon or not.
When Ron brought the petrified deck timber home, he,
as well as all who saw it, knew that it looked like a
piece of wood turned to stone (petrified). However,
looks can be deceiving, so he took it to Galbraith Labs
to be analyzed. Chiselling a sample from the specimen
(on camera), they analyzed it and found that it did contain
inorganic carbon (.0081%). However, it also
contained .7019% ORGANIC CARBON, which is over
100 times more than the amount of inorganic carbon!
Every petrified object ever found that was once living, tree branch,
bone, sea shell, etc., will show organic carbon in its analysis.
So, the deck timber specimen was once composed of living matter!
Since it didn't look like a bone or a shell, we feel pretty
confident in stating that it is petrified wood. Ok, we have
decaying lava which is revealing the presence of petrified
objects that look like wood and contain large amounts of
iron and other metals.
Remember we discussed how the substances found in the petrified object
got there by being washed in from flowing water which had first past
over other substances? So where did the iron come from? In order for
there to be such a high percentage of iron in the petrified wood, the
water which effected its petrification had to pass over a large amount
of iron prior to reaching the petrifying object. The soil above the
ark does not contain that much iron. One control specimen taken from
the area OUTSIDE the ark, but within 50 or so yards, revealed
a .54% iron and .77% ferric oxide content.
If we are to believe that the petrified wood received its iron content
from the naturally-occurring iron in the region above the ship, we
would have to believe that the entire iron content of the region
was gathered up by the waters and deposited only in the petrified
wood. In other words, it's impossible. The large amounts of metals
in the petrified wood could only come from one place - from the
water passing over a large amount of metal in the ark's
structure - metal which we now know comprises the thousands
of fittings which held the timbers together.
The Ark Hidden for Many, Many Years
And so the ark sat for many, many years, its presence unknown since
its being covered by the lava flow, which incidentally carried it
down the mountain until it was impaled on a massive outcropping of
bedrock. But we'll get to that later. In the late 1950's, the
high-altitude photo taken during the NATO survey showed this
incredible outline of a ship high on a mountainside in a mudflow.
The first expedition to the site in 1960 didn't see anything they
could recognize as being a man-made object because all that was
visible was the decayed lava which was now a layer of rich,
fertile soil. Oh, here and there a "rock protruded through
the earth which was actually petrified wood, but its
weathered condition camouflaged its true identify.
The early expedition didn't understand what to expect:
they were looking for an intact boat.
Truth Shall Spring Out of the Earth
Then, in late 1978, an earthquake cause the soil surrounding the
mysterious "shape" to fall away from the sides, giving the effect
that the "capsule" had literally popped up from the earth. With
the soil removed from the sides, the object took on even more of
the recognizable shape of a ship. The sides displayed indentions
at evenly spaced intervals, which were actually the empty spaces
where rib timbers once were. But why are they empty? What
happened to the rib timbers if they were petrified? The answer
Identification by What is Not Present
Let's again return to our favorite science book, "The Larousee
Encyclopedia" from which we quoted above: "Whenever rocks are
exposed to attack by weathering process, loose material forms,
sometimes in large quantities. Mass wasting is almost inseparable
from weathering and the many other agents of gradation. Water,
for example, aids its work considerably. In mountain areas
daily freeze-and-thaw action, or frost wedging, plays its part.
Fissures in the rocks fill with water which freezes and expands
at night. Under the pressure of the innumerable wedges of ice,
the rock cracks. Next morning, the ice melts in the sun and
no longer supports the rock fragments, many of which roll
down the slope to join other rocks and debris at the foot." Page 41.
Keep in mind that the structures of the ark were petrified and now
turned to stone. When the soil around the sides of the ark was still
in place, the ribs were preserved. We know this even though they are
now gone. The way we know is simple- the empty indentations, evenly
spaced, are all the evidence we need. Like a footprint in the mud,
they wouldn't be there if a foot hadn't been there earlier. The weather
extremes of the region had accomplished this process of "frost wedging"
which fractured the rib timbers which were now turned to stone.
They remained in place as long as the surrounding soil held them.
But when it fell away, the fractured "turned to stone" timbers
fell into pieces and specimens of the petrified wood lie all around the site.
Color Difference of the Petrified Ribs
The internal structure members are in a much better state simply because
they have not been exposed to the elements. On the east side of the ark
is a section in which the rib timbers are exposed but have not
completely fallen away and left holes where they once were. However,
these are fractured, having suffered from "frost wedging". It was on
this section that Ron and Richard performed the "mini-excavation"
in which the ribs were able to be seen due to the color difference,
even though the ribs are in a fragmented state. They are still held
in place by the soil, probably due to their angle and also some Divine
assistance. Above, the fragmented petrified ribs can be recognized
by their color, in contrast to the soil, which is darker.
What Caused the Color Difference?
This above section is at the front of the ship on the uphill section.
The substances in the water which were flowing over the ship's
structures and which effected its petrification were minerals
from above the ship. These minerals consisted of silica from
the soil, lime and calcium, to name a few. This gave the petrified
structure a "whitish" appearance, compared to the petrified remains
of the lower section of the ship, which featured a darker color due
to the large amount of metals in them. We have two specimens of
petrified wood, both about six inches long, both two inches wide and 1
1/2 inches deep. They are identical except for one thing - the piece
which came from inside the crack near the front of the ship is very
light colored, while the other piece is dark. They are both petrified
wood pieces from the ship, only one piece's molecules were replaced
by lighter colored substances than the other.
Other Exposed Structure Members
The timbers which extend out through the ground surface, such as
the deck support beams and the deck joists, today look like ordinary rocks.
Why? Because they ARE rocks - petrification, or mineral replacement, turns
objects into rocks. And these petrified timbers have been exposed to
the elements and have suffered extreme weathering. However, the deck
joists, being located high on the sides of the ribs, are located in
a position where the surface water flows past them. This limits the
"frost wedging" to a degree, which other structure located in a
lower section where the surface water tends to collect, suffers.
What this means in simple language is that the petrified structure members
which are near the surface are more vulnerable to fracturing into small
pieces if they lie in an area where surface water stands. In the winters,
the water, which has seeped into its tiny cracks and crevasses, subjects
the petrified structure to continual expansion due to the water freezing,
fracturing it into pieces. Once the soil surrounding and supporting this
structure is removed, the fragments collapse into a heap. Voila - no more
visibly identifiable petrified structure - only a heap of what looks like
rocks. But lab analysis still reveals what these "rocks"
once were by the presence of the organic carbon which is
not present in objects (natural rocks) which were not once
Another Similar Boat Escavated
In 1939, a very unique excavation took place of an ancient burial boat
known today as the "Sutton Hoo" boat. When carefully excavated, they
discovered that, "yes", there had once been an ancient burial boat there -
however, the wooden structure had long ago decayed. What was still present
were the decomposed and siliconized iron fittings which held the timbers
together. As they removed the soil from the area, they discovered that
the decayed wood had left a color difference in the soil which
distinctly showed the structure of the ship in the earth. The
iron fittings, still in place, combined with this coloration
in the soil, allowed the excavators to preserve the perfect
imprint of the ship. On a very small scale, this is similar
to the condition of the ark except for the fact that the
ark does still contain a large amount of internal petrified
The Internal Structure Revealed
But how do we know about the internal structure? The radar scans. The
sub-surface interface radar revealed a pattern of internal structure
which the makers of the radar determined to be "not of natural origin".
The radar doesn't tell us precisely what the internal structure is
made of, although limited distinction is possible because of different
densities. However, it definitely reveals its shape and location.
And whatever it is, the specialists declared that it is "man-made"
because of its organized pattern. Nothing in nature occurs in the
perfect pattern of a ship's internal structure. This, combined
with the pattern of evenly-space metal detector readings on the
ship, prove that the structure contained metal at the
intersections where the timbers were joined together.
The "rocks" which displayed the metal readings may have looked like "rocks",
but we now understand why. The exposed timbers which contained the metal
fittings were fossilized. When exposed to the elements, they fragmented which
left them looking like weathered rocks. But, the metal content is so
concentrated at these precise spots that lab analyses revealed the presence
of metal in concentrations and forms which is not natural.
Back to the "Christ-Centered Mall"
This information was written by Mary Nell Wyatt.
To find out more detail please visit Anchor Stones:
Wyatt Archaeological Research