|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Bob Cornuke and Noah's Ark in Iran? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Textcritic Inactive Member |
Bob Cornuke is a self-styled "biblical investigator" with less than impressive credentials, who has claimed to have discovered remains of what may be the most ancient shipwreck in history. Located on a slope 13,120 feet above sea level rests an unusual "ark-shaped" object in excess of 400' in length. What is most peculiar and significant about the object is that many of the pieces of the find resemble petrified, hewn timbers, which have been located amid fossilized remnants of thousands of shells.
Check out links to a story with pictures and a video: No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.worldviewweekend.com/secure/cwnetwork/article.php?&ArticleID=813 Page Not Found | Worldview Weekend Broadcast Network Cornuke was recently featured on FoxNews, and there is a great deal of growing enthusiasm within Christian circles regarding his interpretation of the find. His pictures and video are compelling, and it appears that there is yet to be a response from the scientific community. Does anyone know anything else about Cornuke's claims? What is the geological evaluation of his evidence? Could this in fact be an ancient shipwreck? If not, what is it? I felt that this deserved its own thread in light of the recent exposure Mr. Cornuke has received. His discovery is certainly much more persuasive than the widely debunked Ron Wyatt. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Added missing space in topic title.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
From the first link:
Even more intriguing, some of the wood-like rocks were tested just this week and actually proved to be petrified wood.... How does wood petrify without being buried? "These monkeys are at once the ugliest and the most beautiful creatures on the planet./ And the monkeys don't want to be monkeys; they want to be something else./ But they're not." -- Ernie Cline
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1371 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
How does wood petrify without being buried? it petrifies buried, and then becomse un-buried. erosion is a magical thing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1371 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
His discovery is certainly much more persuasive than the widely debunked Ron Wyatt. i disagree. this read exactly like wyatt. the same second-hand stories, and the same any-wood-on-a-mountain-must-be-the-ark mentality, and the same kinds of books and dvds for sale. frankly, the pictures are less than convincing. wyatt's site at least looks like a boat. kind of.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
An big boat sitting on a mountain side gets buried deep enough to be exposed to the ground water; the original material decays away, begin replaced by the minerals; then erosion exposed the petrified big boat again to the world.
I suppose 4000 years might be long enough for all this to occur, but I think you last comment is closer: magical indeed. But then I don't claim to be an expert. Are there examples of archaeological artifacts of wood that have been petrified after their initial manufacture? "These monkeys are at once the ugliest and the most beautiful creatures on the planet./ And the monkeys don't want to be monkeys; they want to be something else./ But they're not." -- Ernie Cline
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1371 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
I suppose 4000 years might be long enough for all this to occur, *coughnocough*
but I think you last comment is closer: magical indeed. But then I don't claim to be an expert. Are there examples of archaeological artifacts of wood that have been petrified after their initial manufacture? not that i know of. i was just pointing out that petrified wood sticking out of the ground is not uncommon. you can see some fine examples of it in arizona, for instance. Edited by arachnophilia, : typo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Textcritic Inactive Member |
It is at moments like these that I wish I were a geologist...ok, not really.
If the formations are indeed pertified wood (is it possible to tell from the photographs one way or another?), is there a naturalistic explanation for their "hewn" appearence?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
Let's forget the petrified wood business.
Suppose that wood that has been worked by humans has been found on a mountain in Iran. What is the significance? "These monkeys are at once the ugliest and the most beautiful creatures on the planet./ And the monkeys don't want to be monkeys; they want to be something else./ But they're not." -- Ernie Cline
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 762 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
Even more intriguing, some of the wood-like rocks were tested just this week and actually proved to be petrified wood.... And how does one test for petrified wood? My guess would have been by looking at it with an experienced eye to see if it had any of the morphological characters of known petrified wood: mineralogy would tell you almost nothing, I would think. (Unless it's basalt - I'd like to see a mechanism for replacement of wood by basalt. Or granite.) I realize this is apologetics/journalism we're getting, but I'd really like to know what tests they ran.....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
anglagard Member (Idle past 864 days) Posts: 2339 From: Socorro, New Mexico USA Joined: |
If the formations are indeed pertified wood (is it possible to tell from the photographs one way or another?), is there a naturalistic explanation for their "hewn" appearence? From the pictures it looks like shale {ABE - or slate, depending on grain size}, a common fine-grained sedimentary rock. You can see eroded chips of it all over. However, I would like a sample to be more definitive, hope they don't all magically disappear as has happened in the past with much of Wyatt's "evidence." Edited by anglagard, : add slate
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1371 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
It is at moments like these that I wish I were a geologist...ok, not really. i was vaguely interested in geology (and paleontology) for some part of my childhood.
If the formations are indeed pertified wood (is it possible to tell from the photographs one way or another?), now, i'm not a qualified geologist, but i am comparing the photos of the petrified wood i happen to have in my closet. and the closeups certainly appear to be petrified wood to me. i could be wrong.
is there a naturalistic explanation for their "hewn" appearence? i see nothing abnormal.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1371 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
Let's forget the petrified wood business. no, let's not. because it looks a lot like petrified wood to me, which highly suggests that it is a natural formation. i know of no examples of any man-made wooden structure that has petrified.
Suppose that wood that has been worked by humans has been found on a mountain in Iran. What is the significance? also nothing. but i fail to see anything that indicate this wood was worked by humans.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1371 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
From the pictures it looks like shale {ABE - or slate, depending on grain size}, a common fine-grained sedimentary rock. You can see eroded chips of it all over. yes, quite a lot of the stuff they photographed looks like your average shale or slate. but pictures 14 and 7 and 2 look a bit like petrified wood to me. might not be, of course. hard to tell from these pictures, and with my very limite knowledge of geology. Edited by arachnophilia, : bad link
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
My intent was to bring up yet another issue that needs to be resolved in this "discovery". So far we now three separate issues that should be addressed to evaluate the significance of this 'discovery":
(1) Are these rocks petrified wood? (2) Was the original wood worked by humans? (3) What is the significance of a manufactured wooden structure (petrified or not) found on a mountain in Iran? Even if (1) and (2) can be answered "yes" (and I don't mean to claim they aren't important questions in their own right), we would still need to ask "A manufactured wooden structure has been found on an Iranian mountain; so what?" Just another point of discussion concerning the validity of this "find". "These monkeys are at once the ugliest and the most beautiful creatures on the planet./ And the monkeys don't want to be monkeys; they want to be something else./ But they're not." -- Ernie Cline
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024