Changes

| caption=The replica of Noah's ark shown above is 1/75 scale. For comparison purposes, both the railroad stockcar and model of the sailing ship Pinta (one of Columbus' ships) are also at the same 1/75 scale model size.<ref>[http://www.biblestudy.org/biblepic/arksize.html Scale model replica of Noah's ark - Biblestudy.org]</ref>

| caption=The replica of Noah's ark shown above is 1/75 scale. For comparison purposes, both the railroad stockcar and model of the sailing ship Pinta (one of Columbus' ships) are also at the same 1/75 scale model size.<ref>[http://www.biblestudy.org/biblepic/arksize.html Scale model replica of Noah's ark - Biblestudy.org]</ref>

| owner=[[Noah]]

| owner=[[Noah]]

| authorized=1 Eitanim 1536 AM (4 October 2469 BC)(traditional reckoning).

| authorized=1 Eitanim 1536 AM (4 October 2469 BC) (traditional reckoning).

| keellaid=1 Abib 1536 AM (30 March 2468 BC)(traditional reckoning).

| keellaid=1 Abib 1536 AM (30 March 2468 BC) (traditional reckoning).

| commissioned=10 Bul 1656 AM (5 November 2349 BC)(traditional reckoning).

| commissioned=10 Bul 1656 AM (5 November 2349 BC) (traditional reckoning).

| launched=17 Bul 1656 AM (12 November 2349 BC) according to young-Earth chronology calculated from the Genesis genealogies; not supported by archaeological or radiocarbon evidence. <ref name="bronk">Bronk Ramsey, C., Dee, M. W., Rowland, J. M., Higham, T. F. G., Harris, S. A., Brock, F., Quiles, A., Wild, E. M., Marcus, E. S., & Shortland, A. J. (2010). Radiocarbon-based chronology for dynastic Egypt. ''Science, 328''(5985), 1554–1557. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1189395</ref><ref name="weiss">Weiss, H., Courty, M.-A., Wetterstrom, W., Guichard, F., Senior, L., Meadow, R., & Curnow, A. (1993). The genesis and collapse of third millennium north Mesopotamian civilization. ''Science, 261''(5124), 995–1004. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.261.5124.995</ref>

| launched=17 Bul 1656 AM (12 November 2349 BC) according to young-Earth chronology calculated from the Genesis genealogies; not supported by archaeological or radiocarbon evidence. <ref name="bronk">Bronk Ramsey, C., Dee, M. W., Rowland, J. M., Higham, T. F. G., Harris, S. A., Brock, F., Quiles, A., Wild, E. M., Marcus, E. S., & Shortland, A. J. (2010). Radiocarbon-based chronology for dynastic Egypt. ''Science, 328''(5985), 1554–1557. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1189395</ref><ref name="weiss">Weiss, H., Courty, M.-A., Wetterstrom, W., Guichard, F., Senior, L., Meadow, R., & Curnow, A. (1993). The genesis and collapse of third millennium north Mesopotamian civilization. ''Science, 261''(5124), 995–1004. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.261.5124.995</ref>

| retired=27 Bul 1657 AM (11 December 2348 BC)(traditional reckoning)

| retired=27 Bul 1657 AM (11 December 2348 BC) (traditional reckoning)

| status=Grounded; sightings disputed

| status=Grounded; sightings disputed

| type=Barge, livestock

| type=Barge, livestock

=== Durupinar site ===

=== Durupinar site ===

In 1977, Ron Wyatt promoted a site on the lower slopes of Mount Ararat which he claimed was the remnants of Noah's Ark.<ref>http://www.wyattmuseum.com/noahs-ark-04.htm</ref> However, his findings have since been discredited by a variety of sources including mainstream archaeologists and other Young Earth Creationists<ref>Snelling, Andrew, [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/1945/ Special report: Amazing ‘Ark’ exposé], ''Creation'' 14(4):26–38

In 1977, Ron Wyatt promoted a site on the lower slopes of Mount Ararat which he claimed was the remnants of Noah's Ark.<ref>http://www.wyattmuseum.com/noahs-ark-04.htm</ref> However, his findings have since been discredited by a variety of sources including mainstream archaeologists and other Young Earth Creationists<ref>Snelling, Andrew, [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/1945/ Special report: Amazing ‘Ark’ exposé], ''Creation'' 14(4):26–38

September 1992.</ref> prompting [[Creation Ministries International]] and [[Answers in Genesis]], two of the world's largest creationist ministries, to make a general statement that Young Earth Creationists should not use Wyatt's claims since they are at best highly dubious.<ref>http://www2.andrews.edu/~merling/</ref><ref>[http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/2996/84/#Wyatt Arguments we think creationists should NOT use] (Creation Ministries International)</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dont_use.asp</ref>

September 1992.</ref> prompting [[Creation Ministries International]] and [[Answers in Genesis]], two of the world's largest creationist ministries, to make a general statement that Young Earth Creationists should not use Wyatt's claims since they are at best highly dubious.<ref>http://www2.andrews.edu/~merling/</ref><ref>[http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/2996/84/#Wyatt Arguments we think creationists should NOT use] (Creation Ministries International)</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dont_use.asp</ref>.

 

However, geologist Lorence Collins and marine salvage expert David Fasold, who explored the site with Wyatt in 1985, later released a peer-reviewed study explaining why the site was actually not the Ark. They concluded that while the fold in the rock did resemble the outline of a ship, the formation was (and is) a natural geological structure and not evidence of Noah's Ark. The limestone that cuts across the structure is younger than the supposed "Ark", and no fossilised wood, reed or carbon traces were found. Further, stones at the village of Kazan nearby that were claimed to be from the Ark were revealed to be made from volcanic rock found locally rather than being from the Ark. <ref>Collins, L. G., & Fasold, D. F. (1996). Bogus "Noah's Ark" from Turkey exposed as a common geologic structure. ''Journal of Geoscience Education, 44''(4), 439–444. https://www.csun.edu/~vcgeo005/bogus.html</ref>

==Ark story "hidden" in Chinese characters==

==Ark story "hidden" in Chinese characters==

It has been noted by several researchers<ref>https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j19_2/j19_2_96-108.pdf</ref><ref>''The Discovery of Genesis: How the Truths of Genesis Were Found Hidden in the Chinese Language'', C. H. Kang and Ethel R. Nelson, Concordia College (publisher), 1979</ref> that the Chinese character for a "large ship/boat/vessel"<ref>http://www.chinalanguage.com/dictionaries/ccdict/?action=view&query=8239&encoding=text&mode=english</ref> is a combination of the characters for "boat,"<ref>http://www.chinalanguage.com/dictionaries/ccdict/?action=view&query=821F&encoding=text&mode=english</ref> "eight"<ref>http://www.chinalanguage.com/dictionaries/ccdict/?action=view&query=516B&encoding=text&mode=english</ref> and "mouth/person."<ref>http://www.chinalanguage.com/dictionaries/ccdict/?action=view&query=53E3&encoding=text&mode=english</ref> Noah, his wife, his three sons and their wives totaled eight mouths/people.

It has been noted by several researchers<ref>https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j19_2/j19_2_96-108.pdf</ref><ref>''The Discovery of Genesis: How the Truths of Genesis Were Found Hidden in the Chinese Language'', C. H. Kang and Ethel R. Nelson, Concordia College (publisher), 1979</ref> that the Chinese character for a "large ship/boat/vessel"<ref>http://www.chinalanguage.com/dictionaries/ccdict/?action=view&query=8239&encoding=text&mode=english</ref> is a combination of the characters for "boat,"<ref>http://www.chinalanguage.com/dictionaries/ccdict/?action=view&query=821F&encoding=text&mode=english</ref> "eight"<ref>http://www.chinalanguage.com/dictionaries/ccdict/?action=view&query=516B&encoding=text&mode=english</ref> and "mouth/person."<ref>http://www.chinalanguage.com/dictionaries/ccdict/?action=view&query=53E3&encoding=text&mode=english</ref> Noah, his wife, his three sons and their wives totaled eight mouths/people.

However, linguists classify 船 (''chuán'', "boat") as a phono-semantic compound (most common type of Chinese character) with the left side (舟) giving the meaning of "boat" and the right side (㕣) chosen for its sound rather than its meaning. Although the top of 㕣 (八) resembles "eight", in early script it carried the sense "divide", and in modern standard forms it is written 几, not 八. The bottom element is not used to mean "person" here. The "eight mouths" reading is a folk The bottom element is not used to mean "person" here. The "eight mouths" reading is therefore a folk story and cannot be used as evidence of a historical flood. As well as this, the account is inconsistent as the Ark (as told in the bible) carried far more than eight mouths after accounting for the animals on board and the Shang dynasty oracle bones (earliest surviving Chinese writing) dates to around 1200 BC, over twelve thousand years after the flood. <ref>Isaak, M. (Ed.). (2004). ''Claim CG101: The Chinese glyph for ship''. TalkOrigins Archive. https://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CG/CG101.html</ref><ref>''船''. (n.d.). In ''Wiktionary''. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E8%88%B9</ref>

However, linguists classify 船 (''chuán'', "boat") as a phono-semantic compound (most common type of Chinese character) with the left side (舟) giving the meaning of "boat" and the right side (㕣) chosen for its sound rather than its meaning. Although the top of 㕣 (八) resembles "eight", in early script it carried the sense "divide", and in modern standard forms it is written 几, not 八. The bottom element is not used to mean "person" here. The "eight mouths" reading is therefore a folk story and cannot be used as evidence of a historical flood. As well as this, the account is inconsistent as the Ark (as told in the bible) carried far more than eight mouths after accounting for the animals on board and the Shang dynasty oracle bones (earliest surviving Chinese writing) dates to around 1200 BC, nearly twelve thousand years after the flood. <ref>Isaak, M. (Ed.). (2004). ''Claim CG101: The Chinese glyph for ship''. TalkOrigins Archive. https://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CG/CG101.html</ref><ref>''船''. (n.d.). In ''Wiktionary''. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E8%88%B9</ref>

== Archaeological and Scientific dating ==  

== Archaeological and Scientific dating ==  

The dates for the flood (such as launch date 2349 BC) come from genealogies in the book of Genesis rather than from physical scientific and archaeological evidence. Archaeological evidence proves instead that Noah's arc cannot be backed scientifically. Radiocarbon dating suggests that Egypt's Old Kingdom was already established centuries earlier, with Djoser's reign beginning between 2691 and 2625 BC, and its dynasties continued without interruption past this date.<ref name="bronk" /> Excavations at Tell Leilan in Syria further show continuous occupation throughout the same period, with the Akkadian Empire taking control of the city around 2300 BC. When the site was eventually abandoned around 2200 BC, the deposits record a prolonged drought rather than a flood.<ref name="weiss" /> Hence, archaeological records show that Noah's arc cannot have launched during this period despite what was written in the bible.  

The dates for the flood (such as launch date 2349 BC) come from genealogies in the book of Genesis rather than from physical scientific and archaeological evidence. Archaeological evidence shows instead that Noah's Ark cannot be backed scientifically. Radiocarbon dating suggests that Egypt's Old Kingdom was already established centuries earlier, with Djoser's reign beginning between 2691 and 2625 BC, and its dynasties continued without interruption past this date.<ref name="bronk" /> Excavations at Tell Leilan in Syria further show continuous occupation throughout the same period, with the Akkadian Empire taking control of the city around 2300 BC. When the site was eventually abandoned around 2200 BC, the deposits record a prolonged drought rather than a flood.<ref name="weiss" /> Hence, archaeological records show that Noah's Ark cannot have launched during this period despite what was written in the bible.  

== Criticisms ==

== Criticisms ==