Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Not to mention did they know how to treat wood back then? Sure, it was high up in the atmosphere, but to last almost 5000 out in the open (or even underground) without perishing immediately? Riiiiggghhhhttttt.....
Apparently you've never heard of petrified wood. I blame our public schools.
Not to mention did they know how to treat wood back then? Sure, it was high up in the atmosphere, but to last almost 5000 out in the open (or even underground) without perishing immediately? Riiiiggghhhhttttt.....
Apparently you've never heard of petrified wood. I blame our public schools.
Apparently you don't know what petrified wood is either.
Petrified wood - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It doesn't take very long....BUT it is no longer wood, it is STONE.
The number of negative comments about this confuses me. I would think that anybody would be interested in this story even if they don't believe in Noah's Arc. I mean a wooden structure that has dated back 4000 years? How can that not be interesting?
Apparently you've never heard of petrified wood. I blame our public schools.
Apparently you don't know what petrified wood is either.
Petrified wood - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It doesn't take very long....BUT it is no longer wood, it is STONE.
You're arguing semantics?????
The number of negative comments about this confuses me. I would think that anybody would be interested in this story even if they don't believe in Noah's Arc. I mean a wooden structure that has dated back 4000 years? How can that not be interesting?
The number of negative comments about this confuses me. I would think that anybody would be interested in this story even if they don't believe in Noah's Arc. I mean a wooden structure that has dated back 4000 years? How can that not be interesting?
This is a major dilemma for some. On the one hand, some believe the Bible is pure fiction. On the other hand, this could be a major archeological find. So we have Science and the Bible coming together and that is simply unacceptable to these folks.
The number of negative comments about this confuses me. I would think that anybody would be interested in this story even if they don't believe in Noah's Arc. I mean a wooden structure that has dated back 4000 years? How can that not be interesting?
This is a major dilemma for some. On the one hand, some believe the Bible is pure fiction. On the other hand, this could be a major archeological find. So we have Science and the Bible coming together and that is simply unacceptable to these folks.
nice trolling.
Why didn't the lions eat the giraffes on Noah's Ark?
There are 900,000 different types of insects. How was Noah able to collect them all? How was he able to know which were male and which were female? He must have been one heck of a biologist.
Apparently you don't know what petrified wood is either.
Petrified wood - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It doesn't take very long....BUT it is no longer wood, it is STONE.
You're arguing semantics?????
You are the one jumping on someone else about "petrified wood"...those who don't know what it is should not wag their fingers at others and accuse them of ignorance....it just amplifies your ignorance.
This is a major dilemma for some. On the one hand, some believe the Bible is pure fiction. On the other hand, this could be a major archeological find. So we have Science and the Bible coming together and that is simply unacceptable to these folks.
nice trolling.
I wish it was trolling, but unfortunately it's true in many cases. I have somewhat of a unique perspective on this being both a Scientist and a Christian. Many of my colleagues who are atheists reject anything associated with the discovery of something mentioned in the Bible, like Noah's Ark, simply on the grounds that if it was mentioned in the Bible, it must be fiction. Sad, but true. To them, Science is the ultimate authority and anything else - especially of a religious nature - is treated with disdain.
nice trolling.
I wish it was trolling, but unfortunately it's true in many cases. I have somewhat of a unique perspective on this being both a Scientist and a Christian. Many of my colleagues who are atheists reject anything associated with the discovery of something mentioned in the Bible, like Noah's Ark, simply on the grounds that if it was mentioned in the Bible, it must be fiction. Sad, but true. To them, Science is the ultimate authority and anything else - especially of a religious nature - is treated with disdain.
Yep, betcha if they simply said they found a 4000 year old wooden structure on Mt Ararat, they'd be interested, but because of the words "Noah's Ark", it must be a hoax.
I wish it was trolling, but unfortunately it's true in many cases. I have somewhat of a unique perspective on this being both a Scientist and a Christian. Many of my colleagues who are atheists reject anything associated with the discovery of something mentioned in the Bible, like Noah's Ark, simply on the grounds that if it was mentioned in the Bible, it must be fiction. Sad, but true. To them, Science is the ultimate authority and anything else - especially of a religious nature - is treated with disdain.
Yep, betcha if they simply said they found a 4000 year old wooden structure on Mt Ararat, they'd be interested, but because of the words "Noah's Ark", it must be a hoax.
Unfortunately, that is true. I never figured out why some react this way. They clearly have a problem with Judaism (or Christianity), but to let their bias get in the way of actual science is troubling.
I wish it was trolling, but unfortunately it's true in many cases. I have somewhat of a unique perspective on this being both a Scientist and a Christian. Many of my colleagues who are atheists reject anything associated with the discovery of something mentioned in the Bible, like Noah's Ark, simply on the grounds that if it was mentioned in the Bible, it must be fiction. Sad, but true. To them, Science is the ultimate authority and anything else - especially of a religious nature - is treated with disdain.
Yep, betcha if they simply said they found a 4000 year old wooden structure on Mt Ararat, they'd be interested, but because of the words "Noah's Ark", it must be a hoax.
Unfortunately, that is true. I never figured out why some react this way. They clearly have a problem with Judaism (or Christianity), but to let their bias get in the way of actual science is troubling.
Yep, betcha if they simply said they found a 4000 year old wooden structure on Mt Ararat, they'd be interested, but because of the words "Noah's Ark", it must be a hoax.
Unfortunately, that is true. I never figured out why some react this way. They clearly have a problem with Judaism (or Christianity), but to let their bias get in the way of actual science is troubling.
where is the actual science in this story?
Unfortunately, that is true. I never figured out why some react this way. They clearly have a problem with Judaism (or Christianity), but to let their bias get in the way of actual science is troubling.
where is the actual science in this story?
Good question.
Ah yes, quite the open mind. Not even a possibility exists.of course... if God is real... He couldn't POSSIBLY have protected it. That's just silly for an omnipotent God to be able to protect wood if he so desired.Not to mention did they know how to treat wood back then? Sure, it was high up in the atmosphere, but to last almost 5000 out in the open (or even underground) without perishing immediately? Riiiiggghhhhttttt.....
Kinda begs the question now doesn't it? Either it is a fraud, because there's no way it could have survived so many millenia unprotected.... or there is a God?
Hmmmm.... things that make you go...
But there is no god...so your argument fails. If a god did exist he'd make sure an ark's wood survived, because you know, it is such an important thing to do with so much else going on in the world...
And no I'm not going to debate you, it's not worth it, but I do feel it my duty to mock your absolutist stance on the possibility of God.
You're arguing semantics?????
You are the one jumping on someone else about "petrified wood"...those who don't know what it is should not wag their fingers at others and accuse them of ignorance....it just amplifies your ignorance.
I was offering a solution to their questioning the wood being 4000 years old, you are simply starting a fight. Quite frankly, I'm sick of you, and I am almost NEVER that rude.
where is the actual science in this story?
Good question.
Not really...
If you read the article you would have noticed the accounts of carbon dating and wood analysis...
