Question:

I wanted to get back to you about a synopsis of “The Discovery of Noah’s Ark” by G. Edward Griffin. (a low quality version is available on you tube) because it raises some valid points regarding the possible remains of a large, vessel.  This one NOT on Mt. Ararat, but rather about 18 miles south.  Genesis 8:4 says “the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat.” Notice it did NOT say Mt. Ararat, but rather the MOUNTAINS of Ararat, which is the surrounding geographical area. We also know there are many similar pagan accounts of the flood story, and one of them is found in the Babylonian Tales of Gilgamesh. This one is similar because the main character also builds an ark, and puts animals into it to keep his family alive during a great flood. In 280 BC. A Babylonian priest named Berossus wrote a letter to Alexander the Great, telling him that this ark from Gilgamesh is visited by in his day, and that they would break off pieces of the ark to wear as jewelry to ward off evil spirits. Berossus describes the Vessel as being 5 long and 2 stadia wide. Unfortunately, many scholars dismissed this account because it was unlikely dimensions of an ocean vessel.   (Fast forward 2200 years later) Merchant mariner and marine salvage, David was reading this account, and believes the verse was mistranslated long ago. The Greek symbol for “stadia” is similar to the Egyptian symbol for “To Mera.” which also meant a Right triangle which was used in land surveying. If To Mera is substituted for Stadia, BEROSSUS WAS NOT GIVING THE DIMENSIONS OF THE ARK, BUT RATHER THE TRIANGULAR COORDINATES FOR IT’S LOCATION.  David Fasold followed these coordinates to a location in Turkey that was 18 miles south of Mt. Ararat. Asking the local natives, he found a town, where one of the natives believed a portion of the ark became visible since an earthquake 30 years earlier. There is a lot more to this story, but basically the most convincing findings are in the video showing –

(1) remains of pitch used to seal the ark, Fasold also reported the ark was not made of Wood but of reeds. (reeds rotted away?, but remains of the tar were still visible) The Hebrew meaning gopher (Genesis 6:14) is unknown but one of the components of tar is kafer- which when translated (or TRANSLITERATED? from which language?) to English is gopher, and the Hebrew word for “wood” can also be translated as plant, stalk or stick.

(2) Nearby, giant, drogue stones. One weighing as much as 20,000 pounds. They functioned similarly to anchors and used to stabilize ancient ships in turbulent waters. Most convincing of all, these drouge stones have carvings of crosses and other markings of other religious and Babylonian pilgrims.

(3) Pieces of Iron were found by metal detectors along the ground where the ship was exposed after the earthquake. One of these pieces Fasold believed looked like a bulkhead. This video shows geophysicist Dr. John Baumgardner of Los Alamos National Laboratories stating that this bulkhead still displays the grain structure of the Iron, and that it had the character of wrought Iron, and that it definitely was a man made iron.

Much of this is also based on David Fasold’s Book – The Ark of Noah.  I know that the media never ceases to publish stories about explorers going to Mt. Arafrat In search of Noah’s ark over and over again. Yet they never return home with any real evidence. This may lead us to believe that the whole concept of there being any remains of an ark is as impossible. I hope you find this information useful and challenging to that view. It challenged my view as well.

Response:

I believe that this is a hoax and is not worth your time or attention. Hundreds of hoaxters have gone to various sites in an attempt to, supposedly, find Noah’s ark. The data here is not at all suggestive of having found the ark. Finding pitch is not evidence of an ark from several thousands of years ago. Finding iron is evidence AGAINST this being the ark, because we know that iron was not smelted until after 2000 BC. The likelihood that actual physical evidence of a boat from several thousand years ago being found today is essentially nil. Even if, against all odds, some sort of physical material from several thousands of years ago were to be found, there would be no way to prove that it was the ark. I believe that this search is a waste of time and energy.

The account from Berossus does absolutely nothing to suggest the actual existence of Noah’s ark. No scholar would agree that this claim is significant in terms of locating the ark. Even if it were (which I believe it is not), then this would not support the theory of Edward Griffin. The fact that he mentions irrelevant information makes me suspicious that he is a pseudoscientist, not a real scholar. The idea that Berossus was giving triangulation coordinates for finding the ark is WAY out there. Triangulation from what? Did they use triangulation in 200 BC? This is very far-fetched. What do giant drogue stones have to do with an ark? Do you really think carvings of crosses on these stones are evidence that this was the site of Noah’s ark? An iron bulkhead on a reed ship? Hmmm….. This is clearly mere fact-gathering intended to deceive the easily convinced. My suggestion is to spend time on projects which are more likely to be fruitful.

I hope this does not come across too strong, but this is how I feel about this supposed find of Noah’s ark and about the search for the ark in general. I have read a number of books and articles on this subject and found all of them to be of a similar nature–they are by pseudoscientists and are not serious scholarship.

John Oakes