Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 141

Thread: Noah's Ark Found in Turkey? Revealing God's Treasure Documentary

  1. #101
    Senior Member jude1:3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    481

    Default

    Revealing God's Treasure, v 2.0, Noah's ark, in production


    The Fruits of Macroevolution are: Atheism, Social Darwinism, Racism, Eugenics and No Moral Absolutes.

  2. #102
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    477

    Default

    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
    magazine is still running, location as changed. contact us for the internet address

  3. #103
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    477

    Default

    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
    magazine is still running, location as changed. contact us for the internet address

  4. #104
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrDavidT View Post
    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.....

  5. #105
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    477

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
    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
    magazine is still running, location as changed. contact us for the internet address

  6. #106
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    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.

  7. #107
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    477

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
    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
    magazine is still running, location as changed. contact us for the internet address

  8. #108
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    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
    Last edited by alanmolstad; 03-12-2017 at 05:40 PM.

  9. #109
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    477

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
    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
    magazine is still running, location as changed. contact us for the internet address

  10. #110
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    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.

  11. #111
    Senior Member disciple's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    588

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
    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?

  12. #112
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by disciple View Post
    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.

  13. #113
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    477

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
    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.
    magazine is still running, location as changed. contact us for the internet address

  14. #114
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrDavidT View Post
    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.

  15. #115
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    477

    Default

    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.
    magazine is still running, location as changed. contact us for the internet address

  16. #116
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrDavidT View Post
    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...

  17. #117
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrDavidT View Post
    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.

  18. #118
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrDavidT View Post
    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.

  19. #119
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrDavidT View Post
    .....
    We have to start with the 'conclusion' ......

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

  20. #120
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrDavidT View Post
    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.

  21. #121
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrDavidT View Post

    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.

  22. #122
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default The conclusiuon...

    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.

  23. #123
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    477

    Default

    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?
    magazine is still running, location as changed. contact us for the internet address

  24. #124
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    477

    Default

    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
    magazine is still running, location as changed. contact us for the internet address

  25. #125
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    477

    Default

    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
    magazine is still running, location as changed. contact us for the internet address

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •