If, as we believe firmly, God preserved the ark as evidence of the complete accuracy and validity of His Holy Word, then it's important for you to know the truth so you can make a thoughtful, informed decision.  As Ron says, perhaps God has provided all the evidence He is going to provide that this is the ark.  After all, Christ stated in Luke 16:31, "If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."

The entire key to understanding the evidence which confirms that this site DOES in fact contain the remains of Noah's Ark, is understanding the condition of the remains. The "world" has a preconceived notion of what they will accept, and that is: a recognizable wooden ship, (still intact after 4,300 years), and the ship MUST be on the volcanic mountain known as Mt. Ararat.  The concept of the ark's appearance has been further enhanced by those who interpreted the fact that the ark had rooms to mean that it had to look like a barge-shaped houseboat instead of a ship.

This concept has been based on the many claimed sightings of the ark on Mt. Ararat - and not a single sighting is accompanied by any evidence.

First of all, a barge-shaped vessel could not survive on the open seas. Any sailor can tell you that. In fact, the idea is preposterous.  The oil tankers of today, which traverse the open seas, have a hull which is NOT flat on the bottom, but instead is rounded.  The wave action of the stormy seas today cannot compare with the turmoil of the open seas of the flood, which extended the entire surface of the earth.  If a barge-shaped ship today cannot sail the ocean, erase the idea of a barge-shaped ark from your mind.  This simply IS NOT a possibility.

If you want to research the subject yourself, go to the library and look up "ships and ship-building" and/or "fluid dynamics" or "hydrodynamics". The "boat-shaped object" is not barge-shaped.  It displays the shape of a seagoing vessel.  Therefore, from the beginning of its discovery in the stereo-photo, it had this one feature already in its favor.

If the ark was a reality, then so was the flood (which destroyed the entire face of the earth), and this means that the ark, IF it survived until today, is the oldest structure on earth.  Considering the fragile state of wooden homes that were built even in the last century, could we expect to find an intact ark, or even any remains at all? Certainly not in the ever moving glaciers on Mt. Ararat, which continually flow and grind everything in their path into minute pieces.  Even if an object survived in the glaciers, could it survive the incredible blasts of the past eruptions, the most recent of which blew out an entire section of the mountain?

Again, go to the library and research "volcanoes" and "glaciers". Read up on Mount St. Helens, whose last eruption was similar to the last eruption which Mt. Ararat experienced, even leaving a similar blown-out hole in the mountain.  You will see the total devastation suffered by everything on or around the mountain at that time.

In addition to this, the Turkish military has been training their commandos on Mt. Ararat for many years, and they know every inch of the mountain.  They KNOW there is nothing up there.

The evidence found at the boat-shaped object, which we will, in complete confidence, refer to as the ark, shows that it was preserved by means of a lava flow which effectively sealed it in a sort of capsule.  However, the mountain it is on is NOT volcanic.  The evidence shows that the lava resulted from an eruption of a volcano many miles to the south in present-day Iran.

The lava from that mountain was ejected into the air and carried to the top of the ridge above the ark's present location.  The existence of this volcano is proven by the broken stele Ron found in 1984, upon this ridge which showed the unique limestone ridge with a volcano positioned next to it to the south.  Today, this volcano is collapsed and cannot be seen except from the top of the ridge, not from the viewpoint of the artist who inscribed the stele.

The lava reached the top of the ridge and began to travel down the side of the mountain, covering the ark.  The path of the lava can be distinctly seen in the present mud-flow area.  One way mud flows are formed is when water is trapped over a long period of time in the slowly decaying lava.  Then, when the lava finally deteriorates into soil, the tremendous amount of water captured and retained in it, begins to flow, sometimes quite rapidly and catastrophically, which is called a mud-slide.  The weight of this tremendous amount of molten rock (lava) flowing upon the ark caused the two top decks to collapse.

If that is so, why wasn't the ark burned up?  There are two possibilities as to why it wasn't burned up - the first is this: assuming the lava was the type which would have caused a wooden object to catch on fire, if the ark was completely covered by lava rapidly, this would cut off the oxygen supply and combustion would not be possible. But, supposing it was covered more slowly.  It is a documented fact that lava does not always cause combustion.

Either way you choose, the fact that the ark was covered by lava DOES NOT in any way mean that it had to be burned up.  The fact that the decks seem to be uniformly collapsed indicates that it was covered rapidly, which would have cut off the oxygen supply.  We do have specimens which display some burning, but it seems to be very limited in extent.

The lava covered the ark and sealed it in an air-tight capsule.  So why is it now visible?  Why isn't it still encased in the lava?  Because lava deteriorates and breaks down over time into fertile soil. Let's again go to the same book we referred to previously: "The soils which develop from the decomposition of the lavas, cinders and ashes are exceptionally rich in potash, lime and phosphates..... Many districts of the world with a high agricultural population owe the richness of their land to volcanic material." page 173.

Hawaii is an excellent example of this - their wonderful soil which produces the beautiful exotic flowers we associate with this paradise, are a result of the decayed lava, so rich in the nutrients necessary for perfect growth.  But it takes lava a very long time to deteriorate - how long depends on the type, etc., and we cannot know exactly how long the ark was covered.  However, over time, as the lava began its deterioration process, it was no longer in an air-tight environment.

The ark is situated on a mountain side that is sloping.  The front end is at about a 6,350 foot elevation while the lower end is at about the 6,250 foot elevation.  The lava deteriorated over time, and being no longer air-tight, it was no longer water-tight. The region experiences several months of snow with the accompanying cold temperatures. In the spring, the snow slowly melts and as it does, the water flows down the mountainside. This means that as the lava began to deteriorate, this water began to flow through the material which covered the ark.

As the water slowly seeped over the preserved structures of the ark, it began to wash away minute particles of the wood and metal fittings of the structure. This took place on a molecular level- molecule by molecule was washed away.  But as each molecule broke loose and washed away with the water, it left a "hole" the exact size of the molecule that had broken loose.  As the water flowed over the structure, some of the molecules it picked up from materials it had passed over prior to arriving at the ark, lodged in the molecule holes left in the structure.  The process I am describing is called "petrification", or "mineral replacement."

For an object to become petrified, two things are ALWAYS required- first, that the object be buried rapidly, and second that it have water flowing through it.  If it is not airtight and has no water flowing over it, it suffers from decay and is not preserved.  The evolutionists will be quick to tell you that petrification takes millions of years to occur, but this is a bald-faced lie.  If petrification does not occur at least a rapidly as the decay rate, the object simply decays away.

As the water flowed down the mountain into the soil and then reached the ark, the structure members nearest the top were petrified with molecules of the substances in the earth ABOVE the ark, which were minerals. As the water flowed over the midsection of the ark, it had picked up molecules from the ark structures it had flowed over prior to reaching the midsection. Therefore, it began to be petrified with substances from its own structure in addition to the substances in the soil above it. At least that is what SHOULD have occurred if the object really is the ark. The evidence at the site shows that this IS exactly what happened.

The deck timber which Ron obtained from the approximate mid-section of the ship contained over 13% iron - iron which came from the metal fittings of the structure above mid-section. The majority of molecules involved in the petrification process are molecules from the natural substances in the earth and the lava. The first analyses Ron had performed on his specimens from the site showed an approximate 51% silica content.

That's fine. The "Encyclopaedia Brittannica," 1985 ed., vol. 19, page 506, (under "volcanoes") states: " Magma consists of a molten-silicate mass within the earth, of various composition..." In fact, all petrified objects contain a great deal of silica simply due to its abundance in the soil.

But there is one substance that is NOT found in natural minerals, which we will now discuss. As I began to study the subject of "carbon", which involves the study of chemistry, which is a little involved for me, I learned some very interesting facts. Compounds of carbon can be analyzed to determine whether they are composed of matter that was non-organic, or organic, which means it can be determined whether they were once living, matter or not. It's that simple. Therefore, the one test to determine if an object was organic (once living), or not is to determine its carbon content, whether it contains organic carbon or not.

When Ron brought the petrified deck timber home, he, as well as all who saw it, knew that it LOOKED like a piece of wood turned to stone (petrified). However, looks CAN be deceiving, so he took it to Galbraith Labs to be analyzed. Chiseling a sample from the specimen (on camera), they analyzed it and found that it did contain inorganic carbon (.0081%). However, it also contained .7019% ORGANIC CARBON, which is over 100 times more than the amount of inorganic carbon!

Every petrified object ever found that was once living, tree branch, bone, sea shell, etc., will show organic carbon in its analysis. So, the deck timber specimen WAS once composed of living matter! Since it didn't look like a bone or a shell, we feel pretty confident in stating that it is petrified wood. OK, we have decaying lava which is revealing the presence of petrified objects that look like wood and contain large amounts of iron and other metals.

Remember we discussed how the substances found in the petrified object got there by being washed in from flowing water which had first past over other substances? So where did the iron come from? In order for there to be such a high percentage of iron in the petrified wood, the water which effected its petrification had to pass over a large amount of iron prior to reaching the petrifying object. The soil above the ark does not contain that much iron. One control specimen taken from the area OUTSIDE the ark, but within 50 or so yards, revealed a .54% iron and .77% ferric oxide content.

If we are to believe that the petrified wood received its iron content from the naturally-occurring iron in the region above the ship, we would have to believe that the entire iron content of the region was gathered up by the waters and deposited ONLY in the petrified wood. In other words, its impossible. The large amounts of metals in the petrified wood could only come from one place - from the water passing over a LARGE amount of metal in the ark's structure - metal which we now know, composes the thousands of fittings which held the timbers together.

And so the ark sat for many, many years, its presence unknown since its being covered by the lava flow, which incidentally carried it down the mountain until it was impaled on a massive outcropping of bedrock. But we'll get to that later. In the late 1950's, the high-altitude photo taken during the NATO survey showed this incredible outline of a ship high on a mountainside in a mudflow. The first expedition to the site in 1960 didn't see anything they could recognize as being a man-made object because all that was visible was the decayed lava which was now a layer of rich, fertile soil. Oh, here and there a "rock protruded through the earth which was actually petrified wood, but its weathered condition camouflaged its true identify. The early expedition didn't understand what to expect: they were looking for an intact boat.

Then, in late 1978, an earthquake cause the soil surrounding the mysterious "shape" to fall away from the sides, giving the effect that the "capsule" had literally popped up from the earth. With the soil removed from the sides, the object took on even more of the recognizable shape of a ship. The sides displayed indentions at evenly spaced intervals, which were actually the empty spaces where rib timbers once were. But why are they empty? What happened to the rib timbers if they were petrified? The answer is: "due to the effect of weathering".

Let's again return to our favorite science book, "The Larousee Encyclopedia" from which we quoted above: "Whenever rocks are exposed to attack by weathering process, loose material forms, sometimes in large quantities.... Mass wasting is almost inseparable from weathering and the many other agents of gradation. Water, for example, aids its work considerably.... In mountain areas daily freeze-and-thaw action, or frost wedging, plays its part. Fissures in the rocks fill with water which freezes and expands at night. Under the pressure of the innumerable wedges of ice, the rock cracks. Next morning, the ice melts in the sun and no longer supports the rock fragments, many of which roll down the slope to join other rocks and debris at the foot.". page 41.

Keep in mind that the structures of the ark were petrified and now turned to stone. When the soil around the sides of the ark was still in place, the ribs were preserved. We know this even though they are now gone. The way we know is simple- the empty indentations, evenly spaced, are all the evidence we need. Like a footprint in the mud, they wouldn't be there if a foot hadn't been there earlier. The weather extremes of the region had accomplished this process of "frost wedging" which fractured the rib timbers which were now turned to stone. They remained in place as long as the surrounding soil held them. But when it fell away, the fractured "turned to stone" timbers fell into pieces and specimens of the petrified wood lie all around the site.

The INTERNAL structure members are in a much better state simply because they have not been exposed to the elements. On the east side of the ark is a section in which the rib timbers are exposed but have NOT completely fallen away and left holes where they once were. However, these ARE fractured, having suffered from "frost wedging". It was on this section that Ron and Richard performed the "mini-excavation" in which the ribs were able to be seen due to the color difference, even though the ribs are in a fragmented state. They are still held in place by the soil, probably due to their angle and also some Divine assistance. Above, the fragmented petrified ribs can be recognized by their color, in contrast to the soil, which is darker.

This above section is at the front of the ship on the uphill section. The substances in the water which was flowing over the ship's structures and which effected its petrification were minerals from above the ship. These minerals consisted of silica from the soil, lime and calcium, to name a few. This gave the petrified structure a "whitish" appearance, compared to the petrified remains of the lower section of the ship, which featured a darker color due to the large amount of metals in them. We have two specimens of petrified wood, both about six inches long, both two inches wide and 1 1/2 inches deep. They are identical except for one thing - the piece which came from inside the crack near the front of the ship is very light colored, while the other piece is dark. They are both petrified wood pieces from the ship, only one piece's molecules were replaced by lighter colored substances than the other.

The timbers which extend out through the ground surface, such as the deck support beams and the deck joists, today look like ordinary rocks. Why? Because they ARE rocks - petrification, or mineral replacement, turns objects into rocks. And these petrified timbers have been exposed to the elements and have suffered extreme weathering. However, the deck joists, being located high on the sides of the ribs, are located in a position where the surface water flows past them. This limits the "frost wedging" to a degree, which other structure located in a lower section where the surface water tends to collect, suffers.

What this means in simple language is that the petrified structure members which are near the surface are more vulnerable to fracturing into small pieces if they lie in an area where surface water stands. In the winters, the water, which has seeped into its tiny cracks and crevasses, subjects the petrified structure to continual expansion due to the water freezing, fracturing it into pieces. Once the soil surrounding and supporting this structure is removed, the fragments collapse into a heap. Voila - no more visibly identifiable petrified structure - only a heap of what looks like rocks. But lab analysis still reveals what these "rocks" once were by the presence of the organic carbon which is NOT present in objects (natural rocks) which were not once living matter.

In 1939, a very unique excavation took place of an ancient burial boat known today as the "Sutton Hoo" boat. When carefully excavated, they discovered that, "yes", there had once been an ancient burial boat there - however, the wooden structure had long ago decayed. What was STILL present were the decomposed and siliconized iron fittings which held the timbers together. As they removed the soil from the area, they discovered that the decayed wood had left a color difference in the soil which distinctly showed the structure of the ship in the earth. The iron fittings, still in place, combined with this coloration in the soil, allowed the excavators to preserve the perfect imprint of the ship. On a very small scale, this is similar to the condition of the ark except for the fact that the ark does still contain a large amount of internal petrified structures.

But how do we know about the internal structure? The radar scans. The sub-surface interface radar revealed a pattern of internal structure which the makers of the radar determined to be "not of natural origin". The radar doesn't tell us precisely what the internal structure is made of, although limited distinction is possible because of different densities. However, it definitely reveals its shape and location. And whatever it is, the specialists declared that it is "man-made" because of its organized pattern. Nothing in nature occurs in the perfect pattern of a ship's internal structure. This, combined with the pattern of evenly-space metal detector readings on the ship, prove that the structure contained metal at the intersections where the timbers were joined together.

The "rocks" which displayed the metal readings may have looked like "rocks", but we now understand why. The exposed timbers which contained the metal fittings were fossilized. When exposed to the elements, they fragmented which left them looking like weathered rocks. But, the metal content is so concentrated at these precise spots that lab analyses revealed the presence of metal in concentrations and forms which are not natural.