PDA

View Full Version : Noah's Ark Found in Turkey? Revealing God's Treasure Documentary



jude1:3
03-12-2016, 06:26 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFoqX6aWzFM

MichaellS
03-12-2016, 09:05 PM
.
Finally, in one bite-sized vid, but maybe their are others. Would have been nice to have list of acclaimed expertise towards the end giving their vet and recommendation. Nice post.

Mike.
.

DrDavidT
07-24-2016, 03:35 AM
.
Finally, in one bite-sized vid, but maybe their are others. Would have been nice to have list of acclaimed expertise towards the end giving their vet and recommendation. Nice post.

Mike.
.

video is no longer available and noah's ark has not been discovered yet and most likely never will

jude1:3
07-26-2016, 11:30 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWgPSJU3Nzs

DrDavidT
07-29-2016, 02:03 AM
again, Noah's ark has not been nor ever been found. Take it from someone who actually knows

jude1:3
08-03-2016, 03:24 AM
again, Noah's ark has not been nor ever been found. Take it from someone who actually knows



Again, it has been found and there is the video :)

alanmolstad
08-03-2016, 04:12 AM
no...the ark has NOT been found1

even the people that are said to have endorsed this idea mostly have back-tracked on it...Many who are quoted as being in support this idea did not and have been quoted in error.

jude1:3
08-03-2016, 04:28 AM
no...the ark has NOT been found1

even the people that are said to have endorsed this idea mostly have back-tracked on it...Many who are quoted as being in support this idea did not and have been quoted in error.


Name the people.

alanmolstad
08-03-2016, 05:07 AM
Name the people.

I will be happy to.

I did a google search and there are sites written by leading writersin this topic...they have went back and dug up the so-called proof that this conman was holding up as his proof, and it ALL turns out to be fake....

ALL the talk about the ark of Genesis and the ark of the Moses...and all the other wild claims the guy made...

all fake...

you also find that the guy has had to remove things from the personal credits part of the books because they listed his schooling , and were also 'fake'.




There are people that were supporting these ideas until they went over there and saw for themselves...then they changed their tune.

There is a well known name that i will be posting on later tonight when I get home from work...



Just as i wrote this post I did a fast google search and this came up first-
http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2007/10/Mount-Sinai-is-NOT-Jebel-al-Lawz-in-Saudi-Arabia.aspx#Article

alanmolstad
08-03-2016, 05:30 AM
the same guy claimed that petrified wood by the truck load was to be found at the Ark of Genesis site he claimed to have found.....

This was all a con ***.....

alanmolstad
08-03-2016, 05:35 AM
http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2008/06/Is-Mount-Sinai-in-Saudi-Arabia.aspx#Article

jude1:3
08-03-2016, 11:56 AM
So what were the names of the people?

jude1:3
08-03-2016, 02:26 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCyOVGBnNp8

alanmolstad
08-03-2016, 05:36 PM
"Claims about this boat-shape were previously discussed in Creation12(4):16–19, September 1990. The site is properly known as the Durupinar site, named after the Turkish Army Captain who first saw the boat-shape on the aerial photograph and who was involved in the first expedition in 1960.
Some more recently have called it the Akyayla site, after the region in which it is located.
The site has been vigorously promoted by self-styled archaeologist and explorer Ron Wyatt since 1977, when he first visited Turkey and began investigations.

Over the years, particularly in the mid-1980s, Wyatt repeatedly tried to interest other people in the site, such as former US astronaut Colonel James Irwin, and ICR scientist Dr John Morris.

Neither of these men were convinced after on site inspections.

In 1985 Wyatt was joined by former merchant marine officer David Fasold and geophysicist Dr John Baumgardner.

Both men have since parted company with Wyatt, Fasold disagreeing with him over details, and Baumgardner, while originally being cautiously enthusiastic, is now adamant the site does not contain Noah’s Ark."


https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/arguments-to-avoid/special-report-amazing-ark-expose/

alanmolstad
08-03-2016, 05:39 PM
"Geophysicist Tom Fenner says, ‘I was surprised and dismayed to learn that Mr Wyatt was using my name as well as the name of Geophysical Survey Systems Inc. (GSSI) in order to lend credibility to his unsubstantiated claims concerning the so-called “Noah’s Ark site.”’ Fenner goes on to indicate that neither he nor GSSI believes the formation to be manmade. He writes, ‘In 1987 I performed an extensive GPR [ground-penetrating radar] study in an attempt to characterize any shallow subsurface features in the boat-shaped formation at the site… . A great deal of effort was put into repeating the radar measurements acquired in 1986 by Wyatt and Fasold… . After numerous attempts over a period of one and a half days we were unable to duplicate their radar records in any way…. I was never convinced the site was the remains of Noah’s Ark. In fact the more time I spent on the site, the more skeptical I became.’"

https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/arguments-to-avoid/special-report-amazing-ark-expose/

alanmolstad
08-03-2016, 05:42 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCyOVGBnNp8




"Trainloads of Petrified Wood?
It is Alleged That

‘There are trainloads and boatloads of petrified wood out there and it is all in the boat structure.’ Furthermore, the prized exhibit Wyatt shows to visitors, and photographs of which are regularly displayed, is a sample of “petrified” wood identified as pecky cypress-removed from inside the “hull” in the presence of the Governor of Agri.’
In Reality

No trained scientist of the many who have visited the site has ever seen any sign of these ‘trainloads’ of petrified wood. Geologist Dr Bayraktutan has collected one or two small fragments of semi-petrified wood which in his opinion have flowed on to the site within the mud from elsewhere. He confirms that none of the regular rock types of the site are petrified wood. Not one of the other scientists (including geologists familiar with petrified wood) has ever once seen any. Yet Wyatt continues to show untrained people samples of what he claims is petrified wood from the site.

His prize sample, reportedly dug up in the presence of the Governor of the Turkish province of Agri, is not only claimed to be petrified wood, but alleged to be ‘laminated’ and ‘deck timber’. Roberts too has made much of this sample, being photographed with it, and claiming that this ‘petrified laminated timber’ is of major significance, since the Ark was made of gopher wood which, he says, could mean laminated wood.

Both Wyatt and Roberts claim support for the identification of this sample by citing Galbraith Laboratories of Tennessee, yet the laboratory ***ay certificate shows that they only ****ysed for three elements-calcium, iron and carbon-no basis at all for calling the sample petrified wood! When telephoned, the laboratory was adamant that they were not asked to give an opinion on what the object was and they were unable to do so.

The only other supportive evidence revealed by Roberts privately was a typewritten statement claiming that the sample (which is said to have no growth rings*) had been ‘identified visually as pecky cypress by John Mackay’. That is all. No one should make such an identification without a microscope thin section which would show, if the sample really was petrified wood, the cellular wood structure. No such thin sectioning has been done, and when urged by Roberts’ group Ark Search to do so (after Creation Science Foundation pointed this out), Wyatt refused to submit the sample for such sectioning and proper scientific testing and ***essment. (*Ark Search literature has a photo of one of Wyatt’s specimens of ‘petrified wood’ which, in contrast to the above mentioned, shows what look like growth lines. That specimen is also claimed to show a ‘tenon joint’. To our knowledge, there is a total absence of supportive documentation on that alleged find, which may explain why it is rarely mentioned, in stark contrast to the other.)

A Christian who was researching these claims writes (in a document forming part of Ark Search’s ‘written evidence’) that when he was shown this ‘petrified laminated wood’ sample, Wyatt told him that he had had it ****ysed by Galbraith Laboratories and the tests indicated that it was silicate replacement (that is, the wood had been replaced by a silicon compound). This cannot be truthful, since the laboratory report, also in Ark Search’s possession, shows that silicon was not even ****ysed for by Galbraith! No future compliance by Wyatt to have the sample sectioned is feasible without the safeguard of eye-witnesses who are familiar with this so-called ‘laminated’ ‘pecky cypress’.

On the other hand, there are lots of chunks of basalt on the site and buried in the surface mudflow material. Those people we know of with a trained eye who have seen this particular sample of Wyatt’s have all identified it as basalt. Furthermore, their testimony, plus photographic ***essment and microscopic examination of basalt samples from the site, strongly suggest the alleged ‘petrified adhesive’ is actually calcite veining."

https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/arguments-to-avoid/special-report-amazing-ark-expose/

alanmolstad
08-03-2016, 06:13 PM
Pitch Found
It is Alleged That

Some pitch has been found (pitch was used to cover the inside and outside of the Ark’s wooden structure).
In Reality

This claim appears to come primarily from Roberts and Mackay. However, no sample has been openly produced and submitted for proper scientific ****yses. The only scientific procedure that could verify it as being pitch would be a gas chromatographic ****ysis-the standard method used worldwide for studying the chemical composition of all organic carbon materials. Tar and bitumen, for example, are routinely identified in this way because gas chromatographic ****yses reveal the presence of the ‘heavy’, long-chain carbon molecules that are the hallmark of these substances. Thus, until such ****yses are performed on verified samples from the site, this claim cannot be taken at face value.


https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/arguments-to-avoid/special-report-amazing-ark-expose/

alanmolstad
08-03-2016, 08:42 PM
the guy also seems to be into what we call "Water - witching""

jude1:3
08-03-2016, 11:07 PM
the guy also seems to be into what we call "Water - witching""

What does that mean ?

alanmolstad
08-03-2016, 11:12 PM
Here it means you hold two bent wires and walk around with them...and they will cross when you are over water...

It dates back to many magic things people believed in before science taught us about the world...

In other words....it's magic!

alanmolstad
08-03-2016, 11:15 PM
If you want I could do a Google search. ..there are a few videos of guys who show it being done..

It's kinda like what the Mormon Smith was doing to convince people he could find stuff

alanmolstad
08-03-2016, 11:26 PM
I'm on my phone so I'm not sure this link will work
http://monkeysee.com/how-to-find-water-with-y-rods-and-bobbers/

DrDavidT
08-04-2016, 03:10 AM
no...the ark has NOT been found1

even the people that are said to have endorsed this idea mostly have back-tracked on it...Many who are quoted as being in support this idea did not and have been quoted in error.

is he still on this? unbelievable. There are two reasons why we will not find the ark--one, its wood was used by Noah . his descendants for homes, farm use etc. and two, wood does not necessarily survive for 5000 years admist storms, earthquakes, hurricanes, fires and so on.

To prove you have Noah's ark you must first figure out what is gopher wood in Noah's time and two, prove that it survived the wear and tear of time and people. Then who is to say that those who did not believe did not make a trip up the mountain in those early years after the flood and destroyed it in order to keep the the flood account from being proven true?

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 03:26 AM
Pay no attention to the unbelievers and nay sayers that flat out refuse to prove and validate their credentials.

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 04:28 AM
I'm on my phone so I'm not sure this link will work
http://monkeysee.com/how-to-find-water-with-y-rods-and-bobbers/

Although we may tend to laugh at the way they do this **** in the video, this actually is what the conman was doing to show his investors and supporters that the ark was real.

Its so silly, but to the true believer this was seen as being a way to belive.

And thats the thing with how a conman works, for they do things no logical person would believe, but when performed in front of a person that really wants to believe they are "Proof".

It ranks right up there with and is simply another form of this -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4QOzi7_FUE

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 04:36 AM
Are you saying Ron Wyatt was an occultist ?

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 04:45 AM
Are you saying Ron Wyatt was an occultist ?


Here is what the BIBLE says about what he was doing to fool his supporters -

Hosea 4:12 "My people consult a wooden idol, and a diviner's rod speaks to them. A spirit of pros***ution leads them astray; they are unfaithful to their God."

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 04:50 AM
so the bible strongly condemns the very type of thing that this con-man Ron Wyatt was using to fool people.

The real troubling thing is that based on this need his supporters have to believe its the true Ark, they then also get sucked into believing this type of divination as being something God wants us to do....when clearly the Bible teaches us that God hates this stuff....

So people that dont know any better are being fooled not only into believing this false story about the Ark, they are also being seduced into practicing witchcraft....

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 04:51 AM
So again are you saying Ron Wyatt was an occultist ? Yes or No

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 05:07 AM
So again are you saying Ron Wyatt was an occultist ? Yes or No

Let me be very clear who i think the guy was....


He was a "con-man"who used occult tools that are clearly condemned by God's Word to fool people into believing a false story that he just invented about the Ark.

In other words , "Ron Wyatt gets people to believe in witchcraft"





Now one of the things true about guys like Ron Wyatt and the Mormon founder Smith ,is that as they are con-men we cant say they ever believed in the **** they were doing to fool people...

I would never say for a moment that the Mormon founder smith actually believed he found the golden book that he claimed, nor do I believe for a moment that Ron Wyatt ever believed for a moment that he actually found the ark, or that by doing water-witching he could find anything.

But as con men, all they believed was that you can fool a lot of people with a good story and a good show...

thats what i actually think Wyatt and Smith truly believed was true.

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 05:09 AM
I've asked you twice.

Yes or No. I'm not asking you to explain.

Are you saying Ron Wyatt was an occultist ?

DrDavidT
08-04-2016, 04:28 PM
Ron Wyatt may have been a misguided person, one who had no credibility whatsoever anywhere except in his own home but I doubt he was an occultist. he was a wingnut who has caused nothing but problems for believers and biblical archaeology.

anyone who follows wyatt and accepts his supposed discoveries does not know biblical or any archaeology and they do not know what they are talking about.

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 04:51 PM
Christians like you are one reason why the church does not make a greater impact for Christ. They are too busy attacking


Ron Wyatt one who had no credibility whatsoever anywhere


Please present verifiable and irrefutable evidence of any claims that you have made about yourself.





Personal character attacks


he was a wing nut

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 05:34 PM
I've asked you twice.

Yes or No. I'm not asking you to explain.

Are you saying Ron Wyatt was an occultist ?

Is water-witching part of the occult?


Is it permitted by God at Hos. 4:12?


If water-witching is not part of the occult, and Hos. 4:12 does not have anything against the practice of using divining rods?....then he is not an occutist....

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 05:36 PM
Yes or No Alan.

Was Ron Wyatt an occultist ?

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 05:36 PM
If water-witching is not part of the occult, and Hos. 4:12 does not have anything against the practice of using divining rods?....then he is not an occutist....

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 05:49 PM
Yes or No Alan. I wish there was a rule about evading questions.

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 05:50 PM
Yes or No Alan.
If water-witching is not part of the occult, and Hos. 4:12 does not have anything against the practice of using divining rods?....then he is not an occutist...

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 05:54 PM
So Alan, are you saying that Ron Wyatt was an occultist ?

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 06:02 PM
So Alan, are you saying that Ron Wyatt was an occultist ?
If water-witching is not part of the occult, and Hos. 4:12 does not have anything against the practice of using divining rods?....then he is not an occultist...

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 06:09 PM
And round and round we go. Alan why can't you just give a straight forward answer of yes or no ?

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 06:16 PM
And round and round we go. Alan why can't you just give a straight forward answer of yes or no ?If water-witching is not part of the occult, and Hos. 4:12 does not have anything against the practice of using divining rods?....then he is not an occutist...

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 06:31 PM
Is there a rule against evading questions and spamming canned responses ?

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 06:33 PM
Is there a rule against evading questions and spamming canned responses ?
You know Im not really sure, is there a rule against asking the same question over and over and over?....

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 06:35 PM
OK I'll word it a different way.... Are you accusing him of being an occultist ?

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 06:35 PM
Is there a rule against evading questions and spamming canned responses ?
You know Im not really sure, is there a rule against asking the same question over and over and over?....

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 06:38 PM
OK I'll word it a different way.... Are you accusing him of being an occultist ?

Ok let me say this a different way too...

If the bible does not condemn the use of Divining rods, http://biblehub.com/hosea/4-12.htm then how can he be guilty?

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 06:39 PM
Where did you see him using a divining rod ? Was it in the video ?

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 06:40 PM
If water-witching is not part of the occult , then how can we condemn him?

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 06:43 PM
Where did you see him using a divining rod ? Was it in the video ?
ah,,,,so you are a bit unfamiliar with what he was doing to provethe Ark was there?....

before we go check on what he was doing....I have posted a few videos of people using diving rods and doing what we call "water-witching".
What is your view of this practice?


It is condemned in the Bible?

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 06:44 PM
is it condemned, yes or no?

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 06:47 PM
ah,,,,so you are a bit unfamiliar with what he was doing to provethe Ark was there?....

before we go check on what he was doing....I have posted a few videos of people using diving rods and doing what we call "water-witching".
What is your view of this practice?


It is condemned in the Bible?



I will answer you if you answer my question first.

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 06:48 PM
see here is the deal...

If you are one of them guys that thinks things like a Ouija board or a diving rod is not a big deal and is perfectly fine for a Christian to use?...then what is the point in my telling you that the guy used such things to support his claim about the Ark?....

If you think its totally fine then whats the problem?

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 06:52 PM
Occultism is defenitiely condemned in Scripture Absolutely.

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 06:52 PM
On the other hand....

If you believe that any Christian that makes use of diving rods is committing a sin?....then we can move to the next step and deal with the guy's way of proving his claims about finding the Ark....


So its really up to the individual as to if the guy was into the occult or not.

If you personally believe that the use of diving rods is condemned by the Bible as i have quoted in the vrse, then you will come to the conclusion that the guy was an occultist.

On the other hand....

If you got no problem with Ouija boards and diving rods?...then you are of the conclusion that the guy was ust a fine upstanding Christian...

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 06:52 PM
I answered your question but you still refuse to answer my question in the introduction thread.

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 06:54 PM
So where did you see him doing that ?

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 06:55 PM
so that is my answer then.

That clearly the guy was into the use of occultist tools to provide his support for his wild claims....

He was a con-man....a charlatan.....

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 06:56 PM
So where did you see him doing that ?would it matter to you if you learned that he did?

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 06:57 PM
I answered your question plainly.

Please show me exactly where he was using a divining rod.

Also, Please answer my question about if you are a Mod in the introduction thread.

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 07:00 PM
would it matter to you if you learned that he did?

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 07:00 PM
would it matter to you if you learned that he did?


Yes it would.

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 07:03 PM
Yes it would.
http://noahsarksearch.com/ronwyatt.htm


"However, we have the following objections and observations:

(a) At least one of the detection devices used in this survey is certainly not scientifically valid, and is forbidden in the Bible (Deut. 18:10) as a tool of divination. This device is given the high-sounding name of molecular frequency generator, but in reality is nothing more than br*** welding rods used as divining rods.

Advertising for such gadgets can be seen in the back of any treasure hunting magazine. The br*** welding rods are bent at 90 degrees near the ends and placed in sleeves for ease of movement. They are both connected by wires to a set of flashlight batteries which one carries in his pocket. The electrical source is supposed to make the device more sensitive!

Then an actual frequency generator (presumably from a kit purchased at any Radio Shack store) is placed nearby. If one wants to look for gold then the frequency generator is tuned to emit the inaudible frequency of gold. How this frequency generator effects the br*** rods is unknown.

We consulted four qualified scientists about this gadget and they were unanimous that there were no scientific principles being employed. Two of these scientists built and tested working models.

When questioned about how the parallel lines were drawn in the formation Wyatt claimed that they were not only found by the above mentioned divining rods but also with two other kinds of metal detection machines. If this be so, then more tests are called for. "

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 07:05 PM
Yes it would.
http://noahsarksearch.com/ronwyatt.htm


"However, we have the following objections and observations:

(a) At least one of the detection devices used in this survey is certainly not scientifically valid, and is forbidden in the Bible (Deut. 18:10) as a tool of divination. This device is given the high-sounding name of molecular frequency generator, but in reality is nothing more than br*** welding rods used as divining rods.

Advertising for such gadgets can be seen in the back of any treasure hunting magazine. The br*** welding rods are bent at 90 degrees near the ends and placed in sleeves for ease of movement. They are both connected by wires to a set of flashlight batteries which one carries in his pocket. The electrical source is supposed to make the device more sensitive!

Then an actual frequency generator (presumably from a kit purchased at any Radio Shack store) is placed nearby. If one wants to look for gold then the frequency generator is tuned to emit the inaudible frequency of gold. How this frequency generator effects the br*** rods is unknown.

We consulted four qualified scientists about this gadget and they were unanimous that there were no scientific principles being employed. Two of these scientists built and tested working models.

When questioned about how the parallel lines were drawn in the formation Wyatt claimed that they were not only found by the above mentioned divining rods but also with two other kinds of metal detection machines. If this be so, then more tests are called for. "

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 07:12 PM
http://www.ronwyatt.com/noahs_ark.html

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 07:14 PM
Ok got it. You're saying that his electronic gadgets were divining rods and that he was an occultist. I understand.




Are you Finally going to answer me in the Introduction thread now since I plainly and clearly answered your questions ?

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 07:20 PM
Ok got it. You're saying that his electronic gadgets were divining rods and that he was an occultist. I understand.




Are you Finally going to answer me in the Introduction thread now since I plainly and clearly answered your questions ?




You know what they were then?...you read how they were?....you understand the full implications?

You realize now that this means that the only proof the guy had to this claim of finding the Ark was based on his use of the occult?

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 07:22 PM
I've answered 3 of your questions and you still haven't answered mine.

DrDavidT
08-04-2016, 07:22 PM
for those of you who do not have a bible handy here is what hosea 4:12 says, with a few verses added for context

10 For they shall eat, but not have enough; They shall commit harlotry, but not increase; Because they have ceased obeying the Lord.
11 “Harlotry, wine, and new wine enslave the heart.
12 My people ask counsel from their wooden idols, And their staff informs them. For the spirit of harlotry has caused them to stray, And they have played the harlot against their God.
13 They offer sacrifices on the mountaintops, And burn incense on the hills, Under oaks, poplars, and terebinths, Because their shade is good. Therefore your daughters commit harlotry, And your brides commit adultery.
14 “I will not punish your daughters when they commit harlotry, Nor your brides when they commit adultery; For the men themselves go apart with harlots, And offer sacrifices with a ritual harlot.Ł Therefore people who do not understand will be trampled

This discussion is getting old and repe***ive. Wyatt never found Noah's ark and no one ever has. But the real problem is not discovering the ark but verifying that it is THE ark. An Ancient wood structure is not evidence until it is verified and how will anyone verify that discovery as Noah' ark?

How will you know that Noah and his family were on it at all?

How will you recognize gopher wood?

How do you know it is not an ancient replica? or memorial?

There is more to discovering the ark than just saying 'here it is'. Wyatt never got this nor do his supporters and followers get this. They just think that a few items in the same area or near where the Bible says it landed is evidence but that is not the case. There are just too many mitigating factors that come into play. For example the supposed calf alter being used to 'prove' the location of Mt. Sinai.

There is no biblical description of the alter thus drawings on the rocks are not evidence for it. Plus how can anyone be sure if those drawings came hundreds of years later or thousands of years later or were done at the tie of the Israelite sojourn?

The same for the ark. Other than gopher wood & pitch, we do not know what materials Noah and his family used to construct the ark or what tools they had access to in order to build the boat. Too many people ***ume that Noah was prehistoric and only had access to stone tools etc but that is not correct. Not only was metal available during the pre-flood world but the existence of sophisticated structures tell us they had more tools available than stone hammers and axes.

***umption is not evidence and wyatt and many others did and do too much ***uming based upon myth not fact.

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 07:25 PM
http://www.ronwyatt.com/noahs_ark.html

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 07:27 PM
254



such is the occult

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 07:28 PM
I have decided to put jude on ignore.


Please present verifiable and irrefutable evidence that you really have a doctorate degree.

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 07:32 PM
I know the truth stings.....

But this is what the guy was into ..
He was a con-man.....he made up wild stories and to back them up he would pull out **** like this that would fool only the people that really, really wanted to believe anyway.

Is it the occult?...yes

is it condemned by the Bible?....yes

Is the use of this practice forbidden?...yes


Did he use it?....yes

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 07:34 PM
This discussion is getting old and repe***ive. .



http://i.imgur.com/c5UoPVM.gif




and

Please present verifiable and irrefutable evidence that You are a Pastor of a Church.

Please present verifiable and irrefutable evidence that you really have a doctorate degree.

Please present verifiable and irrefutable evidence of what college you attended.

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 07:35 PM
http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/wyatt.html


-Radar shows man-made (boat) structures..........FALSE

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 07:36 PM
-Lab tests show petrified laminated wood..........FALSE

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 07:36 PM
-Turkish scientists found metal rods................FALSE

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 07:37 PM
-Metal artefacts have been proved by lab...........FALSE

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 07:37 PM
I know the truth stings.....

But this is what the guy was into ..
He was a con-man.....he made up wild stories and to back them up he would pull out **** like this that would fool only the people that really, really wanted to believe anyway.

Is it the occult?...yes

is it condemned by the Bible?....yes

Is the use of this practice forbidden?...yes


Did he use it?....yes



There's literally no sting. There Seriously isn't.

You do realize that the sites could still be legit even if what you are saying is true about him.

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 07:38 PM
-There are 'ship's ribs' showing....................FALSE

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 07:38 PM
-There is lots of petrified wood.....................FALSE

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 07:39 PM
-Turkish Commission says 'it's a boat'............FALSE

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 07:39 PM
You like to spam post ....... TRUE

DrDavidT
08-04-2016, 07:41 PM
Jude doesn't get it. it is one thing to ask for verifiable proof concerning certain proclamations but it is another to demand it for personal information that is not mandatory to give on the internet r to whiny little snot nosed brats who are upset because they were shown to be in error.

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 07:45 PM
so...in the end what have i concluded?



the following:

The "site" is just a normal earthen site, and is not the remains of the Ark.

The man that pushed that idea has tricked Christians and taken their money and fooled them into believing a lie.

and........to some people it still does not matter.






To some people the need they have to believe overpowers their ability to reason.
They need the site to be the true Ark so badly that regardless of what I say it will not make a dent.
They are the horse the is led to water.....

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 07:47 PM
whiny little snot nosed brats



Personal character attacks on board members.


Please do not refer to a member by any name other than his or her username




Let no corrupt word proceed out of your mouth, but what is good for necessary edification, that it may impart grace to the hearers. Ephesians 4:29

DrDavidT
08-04-2016, 07:49 PM
http://emahiser.christogenea.org/PDF/Wyatt2.pdf

interesting piece

DrDavidT
08-04-2016, 07:52 PM
http://tentmaker.org/WAR/

this link gives the ***le of the book i referred to earlier by 7th day adventist brothers refuting wyatt

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 07:55 PM
DrDavidT claims to be a pastor of a church but calls people names. Hmmmmm.....

No wonder you won't reveal your school or denomination or church.

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 07:59 PM
http://emahiser.christogenea.org/PDF/Wyatt2.pdf

interesting piece
that about wraps it up for the guy and his many wild claims.....case-closed....

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 08:00 PM
so...in the end what have i concluded?
the following:
The "site" is just a normal earthen site, and is not the remains of the Ark.
The man that pushed that idea has tricked Christians and taken their money and fooled them into believing a lie.
and........to some people it still does not matter.
To some people the need they have to believe overpowers their ability to reason.
They need the site to be the true Ark so badly that regardless of what I say it will not make a dent.
They are the horse the is led to water.....




You believe Evolution is true so why should anyone take your posts seriously ?

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 08:02 PM
and...Wyatt’s religious affiliation was with the Seventh-day Adventist sect.

So right there off the bat the alarms start going off about anything he might claim....

jude1:3
08-04-2016, 08:03 PM
and...Wyatt’s religious affiliation was with the Seventh-day Adventist sect.

So right there off the bat the alarms start going off about anything he might claim....



I "kind of" agree with you a little bit on this part. There are some really great people in that Church though that are True Christians.

DrDavidT
08-04-2016, 08:04 PM
http://beforeitsnews.com/christian-news/2013/11/ron-wyatt-con-man-or-legitimate-archaeologist-2486232.html


One man – working part time – on his vacations!! How is this possible?

http://www.apologeticsindex.org/w07.html

http://occupytheory.org/ron-wyatt-debunked/

http://www.fivedoves.com/letters/jan2013/frankm116-2.htm

this should give people some reading material

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 08:20 PM
I "kind of" agree with you a little bit on this part. There are some really great people in that Church though that are True Christians.the 7th dayers are a "near-CULT"

they have a devotion to their prophets that I believe are just wrong, wrong, wrong.

They interpret the Bible wrongly...twist the Bible to teach what they want it to say...and because this is considered "normal" you end u with con-men that run around in their church and make stuff up about finding the Ark....



The 7th dayers are like the halfway house to the full world of the CULTS....




all of the 7th dayer's teachings on the end Times are in error....
.

alanmolstad
08-04-2016, 08:45 PM
thus,



If water-witching is not part of the occult, and Hos. 4:12 does not have anything against the practice of using divining rods?....then he is not an occultist...

DrDavidT
08-04-2016, 09:33 PM
the 7th dayers are a "near-CULT"

they have a devotion to their prophets that I believe are just wrong, wrong, wrong.

They interpret the Bible wrongly...twist the Bible to teach what they want it to say...and because this is considered "normal" you end u with con-men that run around in their church and make stuff up about finding the Ark....



The 7th dayers are like the halfway house to the full world of the CULTS....




all of the 7th dayer's teachings on the end Times are in error....
.

Actually the original designation of the 7h Day Adventists was that of a cult because they elevated White's (I believe her name was white) writings above scripture or on par with scripture. Over the past 3 decades the 7th Day denomination has tried to rectify that but I am not sure how successful they have been. They may still be a cult but that remains to be seen.

alanmolstad
08-05-2016, 03:57 AM
.... they elevated White's (I believe her name was white) writings above scripture n.

I had a close friend back in the late 1970s and early 80s who was a member of the local 7th dayer church.
There was a real war going on inside their church in general at the time, and it got so bad at the church in our little town that the two sides started fighting over control of their building.

There was a push by many within their church to put aside the teachings of White....they recognized that she was very flawed and that it was wrong to use her words to slant the Bible as they did.

But as it worked out, the people in the church that wanted to keep White's words as being the real truth won the battle,and the other people left the churches all over this country to form different branches of 7th dayers that did not follow White.

As it happens, the local 7th dayer church in our town split up...and they had to close their school...and Im not sure who bought the church building, but I know it was to be sold...

DrDavidT
08-06-2016, 12:23 AM
I had a close friend back in the late 1970s and early 80s who was a member of the local 7th dayer church.
There was a real war going on inside their church in general at the time, and it got so bad at the church in our little town that the two sides started fighting over control of their building.

There was a push by many within their church to put aside the teachings of White....they recognized that she was very flawed and that it was wrong to use her words to slant the Bible as they did.

But as it worked out, the people in the church that wanted to keep White's words as being the real truth won the battle,and the other people left the churches all over this country to form different branches of 7th dayers that did not follow White.

As it happens, the local 7th dayer church in our town split up...and they had to close their school...and Im not sure who bought the church building, but I know it was to be sold...

Right now it is hard to know where to place them. I guess it must be done on a case by case basis

One problem would be determining where Wyatt falls. Which category was he in-- pro white or anti white? That answer I do not have.

jude1:3
02-27-2017, 10:29 PM
A few more videos:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJCqqMsy1xM

jude1:3
02-27-2017, 10:37 PM
Revealing God's Treasure, v 2.0, Noah's ark, in production



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TXDFHlwSKU

DrDavidT
02-28-2017, 12:10 AM
the music is nice

don't know the point of the video or why the poster posted it though.

that is not a video of noah's ark ron wyatt's location has been proven wrong over an dover. don't know why people keep posting his stuff. those may not be anchor stones and the crosses on the stones look byzantine or crusader and have nothing to do with noah's ark. can't prove the higher landing site. many mountains have those walls

i wish people would stop posting wyatt ****. he was NEVER correct on anything

DrDavidT
02-28-2017, 12:15 AM
if you are going to look for noah's ark do not look on ararat

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5N6K1fkm2U

they cannot verify that the wood they found came from noah's ark or that the ark petrified.

as i recall those researchers were conned on this structure

alanmolstad
02-28-2017, 06:11 AM
if you are going to look for noah's ark do not look on ararat

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5N6K1fkm2U

they cannot verify that the wood they found came from noah's ark or that the ark petrified.

as i recall those researchers were conned on this structure

You are correct.
There is not any support for anyone finding anything connected to the Genesis flood story.

The guy who was in the news back when I was growing up that claimed to have found the ark, had a guy from NASA with him, who he wanted to list as a supporter, but after a while the NASA guy just packed up and went home as he had come to see that there is simply nothing to the claim of finding the ark.....

DrDavidT
02-28-2017, 06:16 PM
You are correct.
There is not any support for anyone finding anything connected to the Genesis flood story.

The guy who was in the news back when I was growing up that claimed to have found the ark, had a guy from NASA with him, who he wanted to list as a supporter, but after a while the NASA guy just packed up and went home as he had come to see that there is simply nothing to the claim of finding the ark.....

that is the thing and why i oppose posting of ron wyatt imagination tales. wyatt and all researchers cannot even come close to proving their claims. i know of the graves of noah and his sons and i know their location but i can't prove those actully belong to noah and his family

alanmolstad
03-09-2017, 08:36 AM
so to sum this topic up -

There is not any support for anyone finding anything connected to the Genesis flood story.

The guy who was in the news back when I was growing up that claimed to have found the ark, had a guy from NASA with him, who he wanted to list as a supporter, but after a while the NASA guy just packed up and went home as he had come to see that there is simply nothing to the claim of finding the ark.....



There is just nothing to this story.
No proof
No facts
No supporting evidence
Nothing , except for a story told by a guy, aimed at fooling people.

DrDavidT
03-12-2017, 05:04 PM
so to sum this topic up -

There is not any support for anyone finding anything connected to the Genesis flood story.

The guy who was in the news back when I was growing up that claimed to have found the ark, had a guy from NASA with him, who he wanted to list as a supporter, but after a while the NASA guy just packed up and went home as he had come to see that there is simply nothing to the claim of finding the ark.....



There is just nothing to this story.
No proof
No facts
No supporting evidence
Nothing , except for a story told by a guy, aimed at fooling people.

Yes and no. {I will take a moment to answer this then I go again). If you mean the ark then you are correct but we have found other evidence in places no one thought to look which does support Noah's flood and the Genesis account. So No in that case you are not correct

alanmolstad
03-12-2017, 05:14 PM
as far as I know...the only so-called proof of the genesis flood is the stuff they think might have happened around the black sea that TIME mag gave the nick-name to and called the"Genesis flood"

other than that, ?.....nothing

DrDavidT
04-03-2017, 08:13 PM
as far as I know...the only so-called proof of the genesis flood is the stuff they think might have happened around the black sea that TIME mag gave the nick-name to and called the"Genesis flood"

other than that, ?.....nothing

uhm no. www.dakotascba.com has a couple of pages concerning the evidence for noahs flood. just click on the right ***le

alanmolstad
04-03-2017, 08:34 PM
I looked.

i read the "information"

There is nothing even near proof of the Genesis flood there..


It reads a lot like the so-called proof of Bigfoot, or UFOs etc...where many different things are listed in an effort to make it look like strong support, but the truth is, that each thing listed is a very weak proof....and therefore it all adds up to being nothing at all a person could trust or put money on.

disciple
04-04-2017, 05:21 AM
I looked.

i read the "information"

There is nothing even near proof of the Genesis flood there..


It reads a lot like the so-called proof of Bigfoot, or UFOs etc...where many different things are listed in an effort to make it look like strong support, but the truth is, that each thing listed is a very weak proof....and therefore it all adds up to being nothing at all a person could trust or put money on.

So do you believe there was a flood as described in Genesis?

alanmolstad
04-04-2017, 05:38 AM
So do you believe there was a flood as described in Genesis?

I got no problem with a flood as talked about in the Bible.

But so far i have seen nothing even close to real "proof" of that flood as discovered by science.

I dont believe any of the people that claim to have found the Genesis ark.

I dont believe any of the stuff from the link that try to show they have found proof of the flood.

DrDavidT
04-14-2017, 12:33 AM
I looked.

i read the "information"

There is nothing even near proof of the Genesis flood there..


It reads a lot like the so-called proof of Bigfoot, or UFOs etc...where many different things are listed in an effort to make it look like strong support, but the truth is, that each thing listed is a very weak proof....and therefore it all adds up to being nothing at all a person could trust or put money on.

the proof is there, you may have to think about it and put 2 and 2 together but the evidence fits.

alanmolstad
04-14-2017, 04:33 AM
the proof is there,...

well yes you can say that....

But where?....can you point to something that would strike anyone as real "proof"?


I dont think so.


This is what I see going on with all the claims of the Genesis flood.
What people do is start with the conclusion that they want to get to .....The conclusion is that the Flood of Genesis left proof.


That's what people want to prove.
They want to prove that the Genesis flood left proof , even thousands and thousands of years later....
My guess is that this conclusion makes the same people feel better about trusting other parts of the Bible?


anyway, what people do is take this final conclusion and then starting looking around for any facts that might be used to support their conclusion.

They also therefore tend to ignore any facts that go against their conclusion.

The trouble is, that there are not any facts that support their conclusion....that is why the people have to use silly reasoning and totally unconnected things to support their conclusion.
They simply don't have any real support, so they have to grasp anything they can find, regardless of how silly, to use to prop-up their idea that the Genesis flood left proof.





There is a difference between looking at findings learned by science, and thinking about where such findings lead you, and the type of conclusions that are the most likely...
and....
Wishful thinking.

DrDavidT
04-17-2017, 08:33 PM
if you read the evidence at the link, can you produce any other catastrophe that would produce the same results all over the world and in the same time period?

We have to start with the 'conclusion' because that is the event being ****yzed. What evidence would a global flood leave? of course no one can answer that question because there has only been 1 global flood in human history. Yet as we examine what remains we have we are led to only one logical conclusion, the remains point to the flood and no other natural disaster.

Glaciers are another piece of the puzzle. Where did that water come from to form those sheets of ice? The flood is the only logical and provable answer. No other historical document records any other disaster producing such things so we can rule out the alternatives.

What facts go against the conclusion? Disbelief is not a fact.

alanmolstad
04-18-2017, 07:43 AM
if you read the evidence at the link, can you produce any other catastrophe that would produce the same results all over the world and in the same time period?

We have to start with the 'conclusion' because that is the event being ****yzed. What evidence would a global flood leave? of course no one can answer that question because there has only been 1 global flood in human history. Yet as we examine what remains we have we are led to only one logical conclusion, the remains point to the flood and no other natural disaster.

Glaciers are another piece of the puzzle. Where did that water come from to form those sheets of ice? The flood is the only logical and provable answer. No other historical document records any other disaster producing such things so we can rule out the alternatives.

What facts go against the conclusion? Disbelief is not a fact.

Im going to point out to you a few of the problems with the above post and the thinking behind it...

alanmolstad
04-18-2017, 07:50 AM
if you read the evidence at the link, can you produce any other catastrophe .
I dont believe there is any evidence at all...


This is what I see:
Science tells us that due to the way the crust of this earth moves and how the land m***es move , that the areas of this world that were once the bottom of a sea can over millions and millions of years of movements become uplifted and become dry land....they can even be pushed up and become mountains.

This is why you can have hills and mountains that are made of limestone.


But then a guy who is out to push the "Genesis Flood" idea will learn that there are mountains with sea shells on them and right away grab this fact out of it's context and start banging pots and pans shouting, "Proof of the flood!"...."Proof of the flood!"




i reject that stuff....

I think its just a sign that the guy is so desperate for anything to support his conclusions that he will take anything and twist it to fit.




as for the term "catastrophe"?
Thats a opinion...and its not mine.

alanmolstad
04-18-2017, 08:02 AM
the same results all over the world and in the same time period?



10,000 to 13,000 years ago where I live in North Dakota there was a great lake that was made out of the melted water of the last ice age.

This is what science tells us.
Science tells us that most of North Dakota was a big lake.

The climate changed and lakes come and go.
Im sure that in time the lakes in Minnesota might all fill-in and be dry....

But I dont blame the bible for this.

Im sure that at the very time North Dakota was a lake, there were other parts of the world that were vastly different than compared to today too...
I dont blame the Bible for this.

I dont grab everything and try to twist it into fitting into the Bible.
I dont find a rock under a tree and think to myself, "Must have been the Genesis flood!"
I dont find a fossil in the back yard and try to use it to prove the Bible story of the flood.

the weather is the weather......

it changes.....

Thats what it does.

We tend to think that the way the earth is now is how it always should be,,,and thats why when some see the science dealing with the weather in history they tend to see it as "a sign".....

"Oh North Dakota was once a lake?...its a sign!"

"Oh The Grand Canyon was once very flat?....it's a sign!"


well.......not really. it's just weather and time.

alanmolstad
04-18-2017, 08:05 AM
.....
We have to start with the 'conclusion' ......


No....the word itself tells us that it is to comes at the end....

alanmolstad
04-18-2017, 08:12 AM
there has only been 1 global flood in human history..


Who says?

The Bible only tells us that God would not again flood the earth with water...it does not say such things could no longer happen during the natural flow of time, only that God would not directly cause it as is the case with the Genesis flood.

alanmolstad
04-18-2017, 08:25 AM
Glaciers are another piece of the puzzle. Where did that water come from to form those sheets of ice? .

I used to live in Seattle....
I would sometimes drive out to the sea and have a look around.
I liked to check with the locals to know when the tide was out so as to be able to walk on the dry land that was once under the sea to spot cool things there.

But then the tide would come in and I would have to go back to the higher land.

So this vast area, stretching for hundreds and thousands of miles, would get covered in sea water...and where once I stood totally dry was now in very deep water.

Did God have to make that water that day?

Where did the water come from?...for it was not there before?

Now if you dont know a thing about how the world works, then yes, you might be tempted to say, "The water must have just been created today!"...because from your limited point of view there is no other explanation that answers the question, "Where was this water?"

You might even do experiments and prove that "Water only moves down hill"...and use this to prove that when the tide goes out each day "Its because it is falling into a hole someplace under the sea"


So if you stick to a very limited understanding of how this world works, you can use many "facts" to prove all kinds of silly ideas.

It's the same with the water that formed the ice that once covered my home state of North Dakota....
Im sure if you only stick to a very limited understanding of this world, then the only answer you can think of that fits as to where all the water came from would be "It was magic!"



But if you study how the world actually works, then you dont need to play the "magic card" just to understand the weather.

alanmolstad
04-18-2017, 08:42 AM
This is the real final conclusion that you come to after looking at all the so-called proof that people have tried to put up as a means to support the great flood of genesis.

The conclusion is - its fake.

There is no supporting proof at all of the genesis flood story known to real science.

There is also no proof against the flood story as well.

The so-called proof is just junk science that is being produced to sell books and ideas to people that are desperate for something to hang on to. Perhaps they believe that if they can find some type of poof for the Genesis flood being true that this will help them feel justified in believing other parts of the Bible?....

perhaps....


I just know that they are always going to be let down by fake science, and if they try to build their faith on that type of unreliable foundation they are going to end up being paranoid that science is out to disprove their religion.

DrDavidT
04-18-2017, 09:07 PM
This is what science tells us.
Science tells us that most of North Dakota was a big lake.


so sinful, fallible unholy secular science is somehow more perfect and infallible than the most holy God who does not sin or lie?

DrDavidT
04-18-2017, 09:08 PM
But then the tide would come in and I would have to go back to the higher land.

you are trying to use normal tidal events as a re****al for completely submerged villages and towns that do not suffer from tidal effects? absurd

DrDavidT
04-18-2017, 09:11 PM
This is the real final conclusion that you come to after looking at all the so-called proof that people have tried to put up as a means to support the great flood of genesis.


The conclusion is - its fake.

There is no supporting proof at all of the genesis flood story known to real science.

There is also no proof against the flood story as well.


your turning a blind eye to the evidence is your problem. that doesn't mean you are correct and I am wrong. there is proof for the flood account and I have given you some what you do with it is up to you.

labeling something as junk science doesn't help your case either. it does show your arrogance in that only certain people can do science. justbecause my evidence proves the flood happened and disagrees with secular scientific thought doe snot mean I do junk science or that I am wrong

DrDavidT
04-18-2017, 09:14 PM
You might even do experiments and prove that "Water only moves down hill"...and use this to prove that when the tide goes out each day "Its because it is falling into a hole someplace under the sea"

another absurd and illogical argument. we could find the hole and show that it does or does not exist.

DrDavidT
04-18-2017, 09:16 PM
But if you study how the world actually works, then you dont need to play the "magic card" just to understand the weather.

i haven't played a magic card.

alanmolstad
04-19-2017, 05:05 AM
You can check for any of the so-called "proof' yourself.....

http://dakotascba.com/Evidence-for-Noah%27s-Flood.php

List for me anything you think would stand up to any real scientific examination?

All I see is a bunch of unconnected and unreliable statements made by people that cant prove anything, and seem to mostly try to list junk from any source in a desperate effort to get to their preconceived conclusion .


Their "proof" looks to me to be about same quality of "proof" you would expect to see come from a Jr High school student.

alanmolstad
04-19-2017, 05:22 AM
so sinful, fallible unholy secular science is somehow more perfect and infallible than the most holy God who does not sin or lie?
Although we tend to believe that Adam (and therefore men in general) were created and given the *** of tending the garden, we should not overlook the fact that at one point God gave Adam the *** of naming all the animals.

This is actually the first introduction of 'science"....and its a *** given mankind by God Himself.

Therefor we should never consider science to be less holy that any other part of this creation, for it is something we do, and something we study at God's own command.




Thus any time I see people within the Christian Church attempt to paint science as somehow "Godless and unholy" I reject that thinking and tell them that science is a very Holy endeavor for men to do...

DrDavidT
04-21-2017, 08:50 PM
You can check for any of the so-called "proof' yourself.....

http://dakotascba.com/Evidence-for-Noah%27s-Flood.php

List for me anything you think would stand up to any real scientific examination?

All I see is a bunch of unconnected and unreliable statements made by people that cant prove anything, and seem to mostly try to list junk from any source in a desperate effort to get to their preconceived conclusion .


Their "proof" looks to me to be about same quality of "proof" you would expect to see come from a Jr High school student.

Science is not the final authority on anything

DrDavidT
04-21-2017, 08:51 PM
Although we tend to believe that Adam (and therefore men in general) were created and given the *** of tending the garden, we should not overlook the fact that at one point God gave Adam the *** of naming all the animals.

This is actually the first introduction of 'science"....and its a *** given mankind by God Himself.

Therefor we should never consider science to be less holy that any other part of this creation, for it is something we do, and something we study at God's own command.




Thus any time I see people within the Christian Church attempt to paint science as somehow "Godless and unholy" I reject that thinking and tell them that science is a very Holy endeavor for men to do...

Okay I understand you now. Naming the animals was not 'science' but you seemed to have made science greater than God. How can science know more than God himself?

alanmolstad
04-21-2017, 09:09 PM
Okay I understand you now. Naming the animals was not 'science'....

Yes it is...

It's also God's idea...science is something God wanted us to do....
So clearly the universe is something God aimed for us to study and discover....

alanmolstad
04-22-2017, 11:17 AM
Science is not the final authority on anything

the ***le of this topic is - "Noah's Ark Found in Turkey? Revealing God's Treasure Documentary"

This is a clear appeal to the world of science.
The idea that was behind this is that trustworthy men of science have been able to find real proof of Noah's Ark.


if there is actually no need to appeal to the world of science, then you dont have to try to make it look like any real science in behind such a claim.
You can just say, "Regardless of the total lack of proof, we still believe in the Ark" and leave it at that.

alanmolstad
04-23-2017, 05:59 AM
so to be clear.

Im not saying that the Genesis flood never happend.
I have no problem believeing in the story and that it is a fact of history.

But I am saying that science has not found any proof of the event known as the genesis flood.
Im saying that all the so-called proof is not really proof of the genesis flood at all.

And Im saying that the people that sell books and make websites where they try to tell us that they have just 'discovered" proof of the flood are just selling fake proof .

alanmolstad
04-24-2017, 05:57 PM
Science is not the final authority on anything

Science is the study of the universe.
Science is the search for truth....

DrDavidT
04-25-2017, 12:45 AM
no science is the search for knowledge, it is not given authority by either God or Jesus.

since when was I placed on moderation? you like insulting people don't you

DrDavidT
04-25-2017, 12:47 AM
This will be my last post since I committed no infraction that relegated me to being moderated before my post appears.

there is proof but you just won't accept it.

I won't be back

alanmolstad
04-25-2017, 02:26 AM
since when was I placed on moderation?

Not by me but the website sometimes does this on it's own.

We had another member Diciple notice this in the last month as well...all of the sudden his posts were moderated..the odd thing is that the Mod (me) does not get any notice of this happening nor am I told any posts need to be approved?

I received no notice your posts were being listed as "Moderated" nor have i needed to approve your posts before they appear on the board.
I have no idea why this suddenly starts to happen?

I talked to Jill about this issue with Disciple but it remained a mystery .
Im told that from time to time the system get a "glitch"


I will clear any thing about moderation I can to see if that helps here.


As with the case last month your posts do appear automatically, but perhaps slightly delayed. .and I dont need to approve them first,
I receive no notice about them at all.
and until you posted about the problem on the forum I had no clue this was going on.

So in other words, this issue is none of anyone's doing..but is just a weird computer glitch that pops up on it's own

alanmolstad
04-25-2017, 05:14 AM
This will be my last post since I committed no infraction that relegated me to being moderated before my post appears.



I have talked again to Disciple this morning, and the issue he has had over the last month in posting still continues no matter how many different things the owners of this site have tried to fix things.

Its a glitch.
Clearly this is a weird computer glitch.

The owner and myself have received no notice that any member's posts need to be approved.

Until you posted about this problem you are having we have no idea its going on or why.

I feel for you, I know that must have been very upsetting to see the first time, and it must be very frustrating now.

I have searched in all the MOD areas for any sign that something has changed?....but I simply do not see anything listed different with your posts.

I will keep an eye out for something that might get listed differently, and i will report the problem to the owner today as well...

As you may have noticed, Disciple has a 2nd name now.
This is because I had the hope that if he got a new name that this would fix things?...but it did not work and his new name has the same problem.

alanmolstad
04-25-2017, 05:27 AM
Update:

Want to know a kicker?....my posts are listed as needing to be "Moderated" as well.... LOL


I have no idea why, but I went back over everyone's posts, when I noticed that my posts on this topic were listed as "Moderated' now too???????



I have no idea why this happens?
Im the Mod, how can the message board system ask me to approve my own posts????


Beats me?


as with DrDavidT's posts and as with Disciples posts, while they might be showing up a bit late, they all do get posted automatically just as before.
My posts are appearing as before too....

But I receive no notice about any posts from any of us ....

alanmolstad
08-19-2017, 08:30 AM
anyway...you asked for names, I gave you names.

The people that were said to support these crazy ideas do not support them at all.

The guy from NASA packed up and went home in disgust .

Anyone that spends any time at all at the site understands that the site is not in any way connected to the Bible story.

all the evidence is fake....all the proof is fake.

The only thing that guy has left is that water-witching that he did and slapped a fancy name on so as to not scare Christians away because it was based on magic.