![]() ![]() Opposite to these, on the port side, a single rib protrudes from the mud. You can see its curved shape very clearly. Surrounding it are more ribs, still largely buried in the mud, but visible upon close examination. The initial investigation of the site found no evidence of Noah’s Ark or any ark. It reported that the object of interest appeared to be nothing more than a natural formation. However, a number of scientific-sounding articles nonetheless still tout findings supported by “visual evidence.” They also mentioned “ground-penetrating radar” and laboratory analysis of “artifacts retrieved from the ark.” These purportedly documented the presence of Noah’s Ark at the Durupinar site. Snelling of “Answers in Genesis” to Lorence G. Collins of California State University Northridge’s Department of Geological Sciences have debunked the notion of the Durupinar site as containing anything more than a completely natural geologic rock formation. The former, particularly, has published a point-by-point refutation of numerous claims made about the site. ![]() It was summarized briefly as follows:Ĭlaim: Metal detector surveys found a regular pattern of “hot spots” which could be joined to reveal a regular pattern of “lines” lengthwise and across the inside of the formation only. Reality: A standard beach combing type metal detector (the type with a disc-shaped detector head on the end of a long pole) indeed found “hot spots,” but these were randomly distributed and not in a regular pattern along lines.Ĭlaim: Metal detecting surveys using a “molecular frequency generator/discriminator” mapped out these “iron lines,” which represent longitudinal and cross beams containing iron nails and/or brackets.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |