What about the critics of Ron Wyatt and his
findings? Are their criticisms valid?
Let us take a look at the accusations from some critics.
"The round formations in the water at Nuweiba are
nothing but table coral, not chariot wheels."
Table coral is round and flat and much thinner than the chariot
wheels. It does not have a center hub with metal, like the chariot wheels
at Nuweiba. Table coral has noodle-like swirls throughout and comes in
many different sizes, some huge, seven feet across, and some small, one foot
across. Do an image search on Google and see for yourself.
"The round wheel shapes at Nuweiba are thicker than the
chariot wheels in King Tuts tomb."
The chariot wheels at Nuweiba must be thicker, since they
have coral growing on them for 3500 years.
"An archeologist went to Nuweiba and asked some locals there
if they had seen the chariot wheels, but the locals had not."
So, since a native at Nuweiba had not seen them, that means they
do not exist? Is that a thorough search for chariot wheels? If Ron
Wyatt had gone to the site and found some locals who had seen them, and then
made a proclamation that chariot wheels exist based upon what one person said,
he would be attacked by the learned men for bad science. So why does this
critic, this archaeologist, have the right to participate in bad science and
throw out that which God has preserved? First, the chariot wheels are not
everywhere. Second, they are not right where the locals live. Third,
one has to know where to search to find them. Fourth, one has to spend
time out in the water, searching hard to find them. The critics will not
do this. They will not search hard because they have a set agenda to
This is what is REALLY going on today with the critics
What is going on in most cases is that archaeologists believe
only someone with a degree in archaeology could find a major artifact. And
since Ron Wyatt claims to have found so many major discoveries, he must be
mistaken, because he had no formal degree. Friend, as Ron said, God
partnered with him and laid these discoveries in his lap to show that they are
not from man, but are from God, because one man could not have found all these
discoveries. The problem with the critics is that they cannot believe that
miracles took place in Ron's work. They are non-believers. Should we
believe these critics or should we look at the evidence for ourselves.
Dr. John Morris, Ph.D., Institute for
"The Boat Shaped Formation"
"...Two individuals . . . promote the
site as the remains of Noah's Ark. Neither have geologic or archaeologic training, and in their investigations both have used methods which are not
reliable in gathering their data."
Dr. Morris is repeating the usual comment made by
others that Ron Wyatt was not qualified to analyze the boat-shaped formation. Mr.
Wyatt is knowledgeable in many areas of archaeology, although he has not
received formal training. But friend, it does not take letters behind one's name to qualify them to look at
the clear evidence that has been uncovered. You and I can look at the data and
come to our own conclusions
without asking scientists what we should think. There were zero scientists
in Noah's day that believed in the Ark or rain, and there are very few today
that believe in the ark. It
is Satan's design that none should learn of the discovery, as he has misled many
people and has created false stories of locating the Ark elsewhere, in an effort
skepticism in the authentic.
used scientific methods of analyzing data which included among others:
Analysis of Metal Fittings - This proved high tech metal alloys were used in the
man-made rivets used on the Ark (Ron's tests confirmed by our own visit to
the ark and lab test results)
Testing for Organic Carbon - This showed
petrified wood in the Ark
Testing for high-tech metals - man-made
metal fittings showed unique metals
Subsurface Interface Radar - This showed a
regular pattern of timbers inside the Ark. Manufacturers of the
radar stated on television that the images are from a man-made
structure. Ron video taped the output from this device and can be
seen in his video on Noah's Ark.
Molecular Frequency Generator &
Standard Metal Detector - Indicated metal in the ark at regular intervals. We used our
own metal detector at the site in 2000, and picked up readings in many
locations. The rivet shown on the overview web page produced a metal
reading, along with other specimens.
"They have not allowed others to see their data,
preferring instead to make statements about the data only."
Mr. Wyatt published his data in video and printed form. He
has shown his specimens from the ark to those who have asked. No one was
denied access to the artifacts from the ark. Mr. Wyatt's phone number was
listed in Nashville which allowed anyone to call him, ask him questions, or go
by his duplex if they wished. Nothing was hidden from anyone who sincerely
wished to inspect the specimens and review the results obtained from scientific
"The rock formation has a rather streamlined shape...due
to the dynamics of the slowly flowing material [around it]."
The flow around the ark could not have formed it to its current
shape. In order for the formation to have
been carved-out from anything flowing around it, the pointed end of the
formation would have to be downhill, but in this case, it is NOT! The
pointed front or bow of the ark is uphill, and the stern or rear is rounded.
Also, the vertical rib timbers along the sides prove this theory wrong.
Prior to 1978, the earth around the ark was up near the top
sides of the ark. When the earthquake dropped the earth around the ark in
an answer to prayer, it revealed more of the ark and its unique features, complete with
the vertical timbers along the sides and a consistent vertical plane extending
from the top of the sides and downward. Thus, a water or lava flow did not shape the
ark. The newly unveiled rib timbers on the sides are proof that the boat
is not an erosion formation. Its shape comes from a design preserved and presented by God for
those who live today.
Also the shape of the ark appears to be man-made with a pointed front, rounded
stern, and similar length to width ratio of ocean-going ships today. The ark has
a width of 138 feet, instead of the biblical dimension of 87.5 feet because the
starboard side has splayed outward due to a rock outcropping which impaled the
ark after it slid downhill in a lava flow. This created an inward
impression on the side walls of the Ark at the point of entry, and a massive
counterclockwise prying action on the rock outcropping forced the starboard side
outward. You can see this effect in the photo above along the upper portion of
the outline of the ark.
"There is nothing present which must be attributed to
It is unfortunate that critics refuse to acknowledge any of
the evidence that Mr. Wyatt uncovered. By this statement they are ignoring
all the evidence uncovered to this point:
A symmetrical man-made boat-shaped structure
516 feet long or 300 Royal Egyptian Cubits (20.6 inches) --
matching the biblical account
pointed bow and rounded stern, just like sea-going ships today
Vertical rib timbers
on the side of the ark, common in ship building
Three layered wooden deck timber unearthed before Turkish officials and
recorded on film
High-tech metal alloys used
in forming the rivets used on the ark include titanium, magnesium, aluminum
and other metals, some of which are not found in nature, "Because of it
chemical activity, aluminum never occurs in the metallic form in
nature" Britannica. The combination of these three
metals is evidence of a man-made high tech alloy.
The regular pattern of timbers inside the Ark show a
man-made structure, as they are at regular intervals and each within inches of
others at the same depth.
Horizontal and vertical deck support timbers on the inside edges of the
Dr. Morris labels the ballast found in the bottom of the ark
This cannot be true because the ballast material does not contain
elements which are found in manganese nodules which "are spherical
concretions on the seafloor containing about 20 percent manganese, 10 percent
iron, 0.3 percent copper, 0.3 percent nickel, and 0.3 percent cobalt"
Encarta Encyclopedia. The ballast in the hull of the ark contains 80
percent manganese (not 20 percent), 1 percent titanium metal, 5 percent aluminum
metal, 0 copper, 0 nickel, 0 cobalt. Manganese nodules are only about two inches
in diameter, which is much smaller than samples of ballast found at the
"Advocates of the site claim to have found linear bands
of metallic material representing 'beams' in the Ark. These were
discovered using a technique commonly known as 'dowsing.'"
Mr. Wyatt and David Fasold used a device known as a Molecular
Frequency Generator/Discriminator, which sells for $4,595.00. Mr. Wyatt's
unit cost $6,500.00. The instrument can be set to
focus on a certain
type of metal and be aimed in any direction using a focusing tool made of two wires which cross over when that particular metal is
located. It is an electronic device. NO "dowsing" device was ever used on the ark.
Friend, if the device does not work, it would not be on the market after all
these years, and selling for such a large price. See this web site which
sells the instrument www.treasuremall.com/vectrtrk/pdf1000.htm
Also, check out this review of a similar device
published by a treasure magazine.
"Dr. Baumgardner has conducted the most careful
scientific study to date. Using subsurface radar, little was learned."
Dr. Baumgardner was not with Ron Wyatt when he extensively
covered the ark using radar. Mr. Wyatt's readings produced an abundance of data since
the equipment at that time was set properly, plus the testing was caught on video tape
revealing regular intervals of large timbers within the formation. There are many conditions
which could hamper
a proper reading. A license is required in order to operate the
instrument properly, as it is very complicated, which means it could be set many
different ways and end up with as many results.
Anchor stones "are found many miles from the Durupinar
site and there is no reason to think they are related at all."
Most of the anchor stones, about ten, are located in the village
of Kazan, meaning the
"place of eight." This is the village in which Noah probably settled
after the Flood. Apparently, Noah made the decision to cut off the anchor
stones in this area, prior to the ark coming to rest 15 miles away. It makes sense that Noah would
settle near these objects. Of special interest is the fact that two
additional anchor stones were found within 1/2 mile of
the ark on the mountain, linking them to the others in the village.
"...Misrepresentation, deception and secrecy rule."
One again we have a broad, undocumented, negative statement that is not based upon
fact. Mr. Wyatt and his work were always forthright in nature, absent of any type of deception or secrecy. Anyone who is sincere and wishes
to look at the evidence has been given complete access to data and artifacts.
"Unfortunately, these two individuals have convinced
some Turkish officials to promote this site as the Ark . . . . someone would try
to pass off a rock as Noah's Ark . . . the sign had been removed, the visitor's
center was not operating, and sheep were grazing on the 'Ark,' as they used to
do before all the excitement."
Friends, are Turkish officials including Dr. Salih Bayraktutan, a
Ataturk University -- a
current and past advocate of the site, so blind that they would
think a rock is Noah's Ark? Their conclusions are based upon the
Bill Fry of the Anchor Stone web site had several meetings with
Dr. Bayraktutan in October 2000, and corresponds with him on a regular
basis. Dr Bayraktutan is an avid supporter of Ron's site being the
remains of Noah's Ark and is currently seeking ways to do further research on
the site. The ark is a National Treasure, and National Park in Turkey.
I believe this should give it some credibility.
It is unfortunate that critics are set on attacking the
genuine site of Noah's Ark, the artifacts uncovered, and those who have spent endless hours and dollars
researching it. The road sign along the highway pointing to the "Boat
of Noah" has been located there for several years and is still there today. You can see it on our home
page. The visitors' center is operating. Sheep from the nearby village may be
found occasionally on the ark grazing since there is not a fence around the site. Does
this mean it is not the ark?
"The consensus is that the remains were seen on the huge
mountain known today as Greater Mt. Ararat, and known throughout history as the
traditional resting place of the Ark."
Should we be defending a location for the ark that didn't
even exist when the Flood waters receded from the earth? Ararat is a post-Flood volcanic
mountain. The water level on the earth only reached the 7,000' level during
the Flood, and yet, the upper portions of 15,000' Mt. Ararat are being
searched. The entire surface has been photographed, revealing an absence
of the ark. The Bible does
not say this is the precise location for the ark, as it says it came to rest "in
the mountains [plural] of Ararat [an ancient country]." Are we going to listen a local
resident who may have claimed to have seen the Ark on the mountain, who would be asking for money
in return for his false lead? Are we going to listen to false stories and false tradition, while ignoring the
REAL Ark and its undeniable evidence?
Answers in Genesis
Andrew A. Snelling, B.Sc. (Hons), Ph.D.
"With this brief background we now evaluate
the evidence claim by claim and respond. Unfortunately, not one of these
seemingly convincing claims stands up."
We will take a look at the criticisms,
claim by claim and respond.
"Metal detector...'hot spots' were indeed
found, but these were randomly distributed...Such a description perfectly fits
the numerous basalt . . . boulders found in . . . the mud."
Dr. Snelling cannot deny that metal fittings in
the ark and basalt could be generating the metal 'hot spot' readings. When
we were on the ark, we received positive metal readings at the locations where
we could see the rivets on the outside of the ark.
"A molecular frequency generator consists
of a pair of brass welding rods bent at 90-near one end . . . connected by wires
to a set of batteries which are carried in the operator's pocket . . . there are
no scientific principles employed."
Please visit the web site below and take a look at
this device called a Molecular Frequency Generator/Discriminator which sells for $4,595.00. Mr. Wyatt's cost $6,500.00. If it did not work it would not
sell for such a large price and would not be on the market today. The
device is based upon scientific principles. This
web site sells a similar model to Mr. Wyatt's: www.treasuremall.com/vectrtrk/pdf1000.htm
You may read a review written on the device.
Snelling implies Wyatt and Fasold only
surveyed the south portion of the Ark with their ground penetrating radar, based
upon one 30 minute test performed in 1986.
Snelling is implying that Wyatt and Fasold only
spent 30 minutes during one visit to the site and have not spent any more time
producing scans, and yet they have shown to others a full scan of the Ark, thus
lying about their work. Friend, Wyatt and Fasold have spent many DAYS
working on the site on NUMEROUS occasions, different years, not just one 30
minute visit. As we have stated before, some of these scans were video
taped while they were occurring and have shown a regular pattern of timbers
below the surface.
Tom Fenner used his radar device at the site
and wrote, "In an attempt to characterize any shallow subsurface features
in the boat-shaped formation at the site . . . . I was never convinced the site
was the remains of Noah's Ark."
Here Fenner admits he had his instrument set for a shallow
depth, instead of a deeper depth that was necessary to "see" the
timbers. He did not receive the same readings as Wyatt and Fasold, because
his instrument was set differently from Wyatt's. Also, Wyatt has not been saying Fenner
endorses the site. Joe Rosetta, Tom Fenner's supervisor at GSSI which
makes the Subsurface Interface Radar, stated on television, "This data is
not, does not represent natural geology - it's a man-made structure. These
reflections are occurring very periodic, too periodic to be random natural-type
interfaces." Fenner is shown on video commenting on a scan by Wyatt and how
it is indicating a regular pattern of objects that are all at the same depth,
and he is shown on a 20/20 segment saying he wished to scan the ark.
"These [outer] walls [of the ark] are simply hardened
mud . . . . they are merely the hardened mud left behind between these erosion
In numerous locations, there are vertical rib timbers along the
outside of the ark which are clearly visible. Snelling terms the rib
without performing any scientific examinations on the structure. He
accuses Wyatt and others of not performing scientific tests when he, himself, is
guilty of his own accusations. We have found metal rivets on the side
of the ark, matching the outer plane of the vertical timbers, providing further
evidence of the existence of the timbers.
Also, erosion could not have formed the vertical ribs on the
outside walls of the ark for two reasons. First, water flowing down the
mountain would create a horizontal inscription on the ark, not vertical.
Second, it was not until 1978, when God sent an earthquake to drop the earth
from around the sides of the ark, that any erosion could have started to take
effect. But most importantly, when the earthquake took place, the sides of
the ark were revealed and exposed for the first time ever, showing the vertical
timbers in their natural, man-made state. Erosion had NOT formed them.
"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.'. . . the laboratory assay certificate shows that they only
analysed for three elements - calcium, iron and carbon - no basis at all
for calling the sample petrified wood."
It is unfortunate that critics do not give all the facts
here. When the deck timber was analyzed, it was tested for total carbon
AND inorganic carbon. This has been clearly stated and the test results
shown in Wyatt's Noah's Ark video filmed at Galbraith Labs. In 2000, when speaking to Galbraith
Labs they suggested to us to use this same analysis when testing for petrified
total carbon less inorganic carbon. When inorganic carbon is subtracted
from total carbon you are left with organic carbon and can tell from the
percentage whether the sample was once living matter or not. This test
proved the deck timber is .70 percent organic carbon. The deck timber was
also analyzed by Teledyne-Allvac labs with their electron microscope in 1992, with
the entire process captured on video. The timber was
first found on ground penetrating radar, and the Turkish officials told Wyatt to
dig it up. Wyatt has photos of the group on the Ark unearthing the
beautiful sample. The specimen was also shown on Turkish television. When
we visited the site, it is true that the Ark is in poor condition, but this is
to be expected from a wooden structure 4,300 years old! Most of the wood that was
once petrified has since suffered frost wedging and is in the process of breaking
apart in very small pieces, but some samples of petrified wood can be found.
"Photographs of the object [rivet] show only an
impression that vaguely has the shape of a rivet head. . . . but there is no
evidence of any embedded metallic object. . . . [test] results [are] consistent
with the chemical composition of the major local rock type, basalt."
First, Mr. Snelling says the rivet was found fifty yards away
from the ark, when in fact it was found on the ark in front of 25 witnesses who
each signed a statement testifying where it was found.
the rivet does not have a "vague" appearance, instead it has a
definite shape of a man-made round washer with a center shaft, the end of
struck and flared out to secure the washer in place.
Third, analyses performed by Galbraith Labs, showed the
rivet to contain 8.6 percent
aluminum metal, 1.9 percent titanium metal, 10.38 percent iron, and .21 percent
manganese. It is unfortunate that Snelling knows aluminum metal is a
man-made substance, and yet he refuses to acknowledge the man-made qualities
of the rivet.
Fourth, basalt does not contain aluminum or titanium metals, so the
rivet cannot be basalt. Basalt is "rock that is low in silica content, dark
in colour, and comparatively rich in iron and magnesium" Britannica.
"Because of its chemical activity, aluminum never occurs in
the metallic form in nature....The metal and its alloys are used extensively for
aircraft construction, building materials, consumer durables...Aluminum is
nevertheless highly corrosion-resistant because in air a hard, tough oxide film
forms on its surface" Britannica.
"Titanium is a lightweight, high-strength, low-corrosion
structural metal and is used in alloy form for parts in high-speed
aircraft....Titanium is important as an alloying agent with most metals and some
nonmetals...No noticeable corrosion of the metal occurs despite exposure to
seawater for more than three years. Its combination of high strength, low
density, and excellent corrosion-resistance make it useful for many parts of
aircraft, spacecraft, missiles, and ships" Britannica. Ships?
Interesting . . . .
Also, the partial rivet we retrieved from the side of the ark in 2000, matched the test results Wyatt achieved in his analyses.
Wyatt also tested his rivet for carbon, and an area 1 cm. away from it. It
showed .14 percent carbon in the rivet and 1.9 percent for the material
(petrified wood) just
outside of it. This means the wood around the rivet showed 15 times the amount of carbon as the
metal. Also, basalt does not contain carbon as the rivet does. There are
numerous rivets on the ark in various conditions. Snelling refuses to
acknowledge the obvious man-made shape of the rivet and totally discounts these
excellent specimens that prove the formation IS Noah's Ark!
"Dr. Bayraktutan, a leading member of one of these
Turkish investigation teams . . . is at pains to dissociate himself from almost
all of Wyatt's claims about the site...."
Dr. Salih Bayraktutan, head of Geology at Ataturk University,
Erzurum, is an avid supporter of the site being the
actual remains of Noah's Ark, even today after numerous men have attacked the
site and those who support it. He is on the Noah's Ark Commission and
believes this site is the ark. "'It is a man-made structure, for
sure, it is Noah's Ark' Bayrakutan said at the time of the
Bill Fry is the host of www.anchorstone.com,
and has had numerous contacts with Dr. Bayraktutan in October 2000, and more
recently he has corresponded with him. He is an avid supporter of the site
being the remains of Noah's Ark and has even suffered "politically"
within the scholarly system for which he works because of this belief. The
majority of the university system that he is a part of, is very secular and they
don't appreciate people dwelling on these things.
Snelling calls the ballast which came from the bottom of the Ark
Manganese nodules found on the ocean floor, contain only 20
percent manganese, while the ballast is 84 percent. Also, the
ballast does not contain any copper, nickel or cobalt which manganese nodules
contain. The size of manganese nodules is much smaller than the ballast
found. Snelling then says no conclusions can be formed until a thin
sectioning is performed under an electron microscope. That test HAS been
done by John Baumgardner with the written comments, "Tailings of aluminum
alloyed production. [signed] John Baumgardner." We have found some of this same ballast material, and will have our own tests performed. One specimen is on our "overview" page.
Snelling mentions the fossilized animal dung, animal hair, and antler
"have all only been found in the mud in the walls - not from deep within
Unfortunately the facts are not properly stated and the reader is
misled. Mr. Wyatt performed a five foot deep core drill into the western, starboard side
of the ark, penetrating a chamber at that spot. He then used a long rake
device to pull out these loose specimens for analysis: animal dung, the
base of an antler, human hair, cat hair, and man-made fiber. They were not
the outside of the ark, so animals in the area could NOT have deposited the
specimens. Evidence of Wyatt's core drill is still visible today when you
visit the site.
Regarding the large anchor stones: "One would
think that the considerable distance of these claimed anchor stones from the
boat shape itself must diminish somewhat their significance...they were not
mentioned in the scriptures...no mention of any kind of steering mechanism given
in God's instructions....the holes were carved too near the edges of the
rocks. Because of their sheer weight the rock around the holes would have
too easily broken off....no sign of any wear of the rock surface around the top
side of these holes...." He theorizes they may be tombstones or
"pre-Christian Armenian stelae."
Snelling admitted that one was found several hundred yards from
the Ark, and yet he cannot relate the others found 15 miles away in the Village of Kazan, to the
ark. The anchor stones are found in a village known as Kazan or "The
Place of Eight,"
linking the stones to the Flood story. Snelling implies that they must
be mentioned in the scriptures in order to be associated with the Ark. Was
every part of the ark mentioned in the Bible? No. Only very general descriptions are given
in the scriptures as we all know. Does God have to mention the anchor
stones in the Bible in order for them to have existed?
Also, the holes in the top of the anchor stones are
located near the edge, because the stones were to be lifted while submerged in
water!! Snelling fails to notify the reader of this fact. The
position of the holes are further proof the stones are associated with water and
the ark! Of course there would not be signs of wear around
the sides of the holes, because the ropes which held them were probably tied in
knots, preventing any slippage or cutting. One side of the anchor stone
hole is drilled larger, allowing the knot to be secured in the cavity. Also, it would take years and
many sets of rope to create wear on a stone.
The anchor stones cannot be tombstones or stelae, because some are
almost totally buried and do not contain any carvings, but DO have a hole in one
end for use in hanging from the ark. Also, they are not Armenian cult symbols
such as the Eye of the Dragon, as there is no evidence of any Armenian
inscriptions on them, and no previous defacement is evident where crosses
replaced Armenian inscriptions. Stones of this type have not been found by the Turks in any other
"Wyatt...produced a single newspaper
clipping from his home town proving the discovery of the Ark...."
Snelling fails to tell the reader that the largest newspaper in
Turkey announced the discovery of Noah's Ark saying among other things, "Noah's Boat Opened to Tourism...a national
park...Ronald Eldon Wyatt and his colleagues...Turkish colleagues completed
their investigations...Governor Sevket Ekinci said: '...It is assured that the
Noah's Ark, mentioned in the Koran and the Bible, is located here." 1987 Hurriyet.
Turkish tourism literature declares the site Noah's Ark. We have seen the
Ark on Turkish maps, one of which we feature on this web site.
In addition to being a National Park, Noah's Ark has been
upgraded to the level of a National Treasure.
"Governor of Agri...officially declare[d] a National
Park...the site contains the remains of Noah's Ark... had the visitors'
center built...road sign erected...vetoed efforts to undertake a dig into the
Snelling called the Governor of Agri a "friend" of Wyatt in order
to explain why the site is now a National Park. If the
governor is a friend, it is only because Wyatt had shown himself to be
trustworthy, and produced evidence which proved the site to be Noah's Ark.
Snelling is using evidence that proves the site to be Noah's Ark, as evidence
AGAINST IT! Those who are in charge of the ark are waiting
until a complete roof structure can be built over the Ark to protect it, then they
will approve an archaeological dig. They are wanting to protect it from
the weather and local residents who will walk off with specimens of the ark to
"There is no eight-lane highway to the site or close to
The Turks told Wyatt they were going to build an airstrip in the
valley below the Ark for tourists to fly into the area. They wanted Wyatt to call
it an eight lane highway so the Iranians, a few miles away, would not become agitated with
its close proximity. With terrorists in the area and critics abroad
in the past ten years,
there have been few tourists in the area to justify building an airstrip nearby.
"Like all true Bible-believing Christians, they [John
Morris, ICR] would be ecstatic at the Ark's discovery, no matter by whom, nor
where on the 'mountains of Ararat.'"
We are elated to hear that John will be supporting the ark discovery soon?
"Greater Mount Ararat itself has been the focus of Dr.
Morris's [sic] search purely because the consensus among historical eye-witness
reports of those who claim to have seen the Ark is that the remains were seen on
that mountain, even though none of them is able to pinpoint the exact
Are we going to listen to those who have "seen" the
Ark on Mt. Ararat, but just can't seem to point out the location when
asked? It is clear there is not such ark on Mt. Ararat, friend.
As we stated earlier, Mt. Ararat is a post-Flood volcanic mountain.
"My/CSF's interest in these claims about the Durupinar/Akyayla
site has only ever been in order to establish their truth or otherwise.
After all, false claims made by professing Christians are shameful to the name
of Christ. Surely the public claims made by Christians about this site
should be able to stand up to rigorous scientific investigation?...When all the
so-called evidence is put under rigorous scientific scrutiny it fails
Friend, I will let you judge for yourself as to who has been
telling the truth, who has been misleading the public. Someone has been
misrepresenting the facts in this study. Ron Wyatt has never misrepresented any evidence or lied
about anything. He was the most humble and Godly man I ever met, and many
people who knew him will tell you the same. Objective inspections of the
ark and subsequent analyses
performed agree with statements he has made. Also, true scientific tests
have NOT been performed to disprove the site, they have only concurred with the
discovery. I agree with Snelling in one point, "False claims
made by professing Christians are shameful to the name of Christ."
"Ron Wyatt invariably has an 'explanation' of why he
can't direct others to see all this hard evidence for themselves at these sites
[crucifixion, Ark of Covenant, Mt. Sinai, Red Sea crossing, Sodom &
Gomorrah, etc.]. His occasional seemingly convincing 'documentation'
(including video tape) repeatedly withers under independent scrutiny...."
No scrutiny has disproved any of those sites, friend. There have
been numerous independent inspections of all the sites, including the
coral encrusted chariot parts at the Red Sea crossing site; individuals have
testified and are seen on video assisting Wyatt for weeks digging for the Ark of the
Covenant in the Garden Tomb area; the biblical
account and the evidence seen by many people clearly show the correct Mt. Sinai
to be in Saudi Arabia; Sodom & Gomorrah contain brimstone, ash, man-made
structures, that are easily inspected by anyone, and are exactly
as Wyatt claims.
Satan triumphs when broad, baseless allegations are leveled
against the work of the Lord.
Letter From Harold G. Coffin to David
"I recently read Ron Wyatt's book, Discovered:
Noah's Ark, and was appalled. It is one of the most disgusting books I
have read...Even the uninformed person should be suspicious when one individual
claims to have found so many important artifacts that others have never found
after years of diligent search."
Friend, are we going to place limits on what God
can do? These discoveries that Ron Wyatt has worked on are all from the
leadings of God. Ron Wyatt admits he could not have found ONE of these
discoveries on his own wisdom. He gave all the credit to God, and said God
looked for one person to use in these discoveries to show they are from Him, not
man. Mr. Wyatt has said numerous times that God chose him because he was
not super intelligent and could not have located the discoveries through his own
devising. We all know
though, that Mr. Wyatt was intelligent and humble at the same time.
Mr. Wyatt claims the wood used on Noah's Ark
lacks growth rings.
Cross sectioning of the petrified wood from the
Ark has shown a lack of growth rings. Mr. Wyatt has concluded that the
trees before the flood did not incur a cessation of moisture since they were
watered from underground, leading to constant growth and no growth rings.
Growth rings come about when a tree encounters a dry season and stops
growing. Later, it resumes its growth. I am in possession of a
section of a deciduous or conifer petrified tree which has the bark on the outside and no growth rings
in the middle. Harold Coffin sites his work on petrified trees in the
western U.S. which reveal growth rings. Those specimens must have been
formed by a post-Flood petrifying process.
Why hasn't Noah's ark
been on the evening news?
Satan is attempting to
cover-up these discoveries, but in God's time the world will learn of them.
Those who operate the news outlets are not faithful followers of God and cannot
be expected to lead us to heavenly objects. Notice that for the most part,
only the fraudulent "discoveries" have been aired, much to the delight
of the arch deceiver. When the genuine is found, there is automatic doubt
as to the authenticity of the discovery, thus skepticism abounds.
How can the Ark be authentic since Scientists generally don't believe
Friend, how many scientists believed in the ark
before the Flood? The antediluvians listened to men of learning and
the forces of darkness and found themselves outside the ark of safety. The
scientists of Noah's day had been mocking Noah and the ark. All the while
they were mocking God and His judgments. We cannot listen to men, but
should look at the evidence and make our own decisions. In Revelation it states that the whole world wondered after the beast. We must
realize that the number of people saved will be very small compared to the
population of the world. This means the vast majority will mock evidences
of God's judgments, and only a small remnant will be saved among the living.
There are several boat shaped formations in
the area. Isn't the Durupinar site just one of many similar formations?
Some say there are many
formations in the area and this is like all the others. Dr. John
Baumgardner from Los Alamos, said on the 700 Club that he checked out the other
formations in the area and they do not have the unique features like this site,
which contains high-tech metal alloys and is the exact length as stated in the
Shouldn't the Ark have been found on Mt.
Some say the ark should be
found on Mt. Ararat. The Bible said the ark came to rest in the
"mountains of Ararat." Ararat is the name of an ancient country
called Urartu that covered Eastern Turkey and portions of neighboring
countries. The ark was to come to rest in the mountains of this
country. Mt. Ararat is a post-Flood volcanic mountain, which would be the
last place one should search for the ark.
"I don't need
these discoveries. What good are they?"
Friend, we may not need them, but the vast majority
of the world has not grown up in a Christian, Bible believing environment.
Most of the world have been raised by their families under belief systems which
are contrary to God's. Before God judges mankind according to their
obedience to His Law, a visual show-and-tell testimony of Bible truth will be
presented to the world. Those who
reject Him will be part of the vast multitude that will receive the mark of the
beast and be forever lost.
Friend, when are the critics going to look at the facts, put aside
their pride, and
fairly evaluate the evidence uncovered so far at the REAL ark? Some have searched for the Ark on Mt. Ararat while having received
hundreds of thousands of dollars from donors to do so. The criticisms we
have looked at here are baseless and demonstrate a form of desperation by those who
feel threatened for some reason. The facts have been grossly misstated for
some reason. I know
it must be humbling to admit someone else, without letters after their name,
basically without outside funding, found the Ark on another mountain and without the
expertise of learned men in the archaeology community. Ron Wyatt gave
all the credit to GOD for locating the Ark. When he went out there in
1977, he had completed his homework by interviewing those who had been to the site in
1960, but he still didn't know where the Ark was actually located. He and his two boys
prayed before they started searching, and asked God
to stall their taxi at the places where they should begin looking. Three times it
stalled, much to the surprise of their driver. In each place they walked
out from that spot and found
something relating to the ark, including the ark itself, the anchor stones, and
Friends, when we don't tell the truth about the evidence, we are misleading those
searching for the truth and are on dangerous ground! Our eternal destiny
is at stake when we do such things. Please be careful not to repeat lies
or ignorant statements told by those who are attacking God's work, the evidence
He is providing for mankind. God has preserved these discoveries for those who live at the end of this
world that have not had access to the truth. The majority of the world
have grown up in false religious belief systems. God is preparing to reveal His REAL
truth to mankind, including the truth of His Son. When Christ returns to
this world, all of mankind will have to follow Him and His Law, and confess their sins in His
name in order to be saved.