Almost from the beginning of their announcement, NAMI’s discovery of the possible remains of Noah’s Ark has been beset by claims that locals have duped this evangelical organization by having secretly planted or constructed the discovered remains. The latest of these come from Dr. Carl Wieland, whose Creation Ministries International is one of the most respected organizations in the Young Earth Creationist movement. Earlier, I promised to address the basis for Dr. Wieland’s conclusion that these remains are indeed a hoax. I do so precisely because Dr. Wieland is so respected. Unlike many of the others who have claimed a hoax, Dr. Wieland has carefully listed his reasons. My last three posts have addressed most of the technical issues involved in Dr. Wieland’s reasons, but here I will address all the specific reasons that he gives for his opinon.
1. The existence of both rough and smoothly finished wood within this structure, and the evidence that machinery may have been used for the smoother cuts.
Dr. Wieland seems not to be familiar with construction techniques before modern industrial machinery made smoothly-finished wood inexpensive. For most of history, even until the twentieth century, the greater labor and expense of smoothly-finished wood recommends the use of roughly-finished wood for internal bracing and wherever the smooth finish is unnecessary. Hence, the use of both types of construction is only to be expected.
In my question to Dr. Wieland, I have already noted that due to the fact that Young Earth Creationists deny than human remains survive from before the Flood, he lacks an objective basis for knowing what level of technology might have been available for constructing Noah’s Ark. We do know that the great Pyramids of Egypt required highly precise technology and have recently been dated almost exactly to the date of the structure that NAMI has discovered. Evidence of manufactured iron also dates from this era, though a great deal of technology seems to have been lost with that great destruction of population called Noah’s Flood. Though all of us seem surprised by the remarkable technology used in this structure, machinery would have surely been useful for a single family charged with building so large a structure. We might also remember that Noah worked from the instructions of a supernaturally wise advisor.
2. This structure having been possibly constructed in summer, and buried with ice in the winter, giving the appearance of long burial to enhance authenticity.
Construction would indeed be easier in the summer. So is climbing. But if snow and ice so quickly cover things in the winter, doesn’t it also melt in the summer? Indeed, it would have taken many years to create a permanent covering of more than 20 feet of ice and rubble.
Why does Dr. Wieland suppose that would be much of an advantage? Why would locals have gone to so much trouble to cover the ark for giving the appearance of antiquity when most ark searches have been looking for an above ground Ark?
3. Big room shown only from photograph by locals and appears to Dr. Wieland as having been formed from lava flows. This reduces the amount of fabrication required on the part of those perpetuating the hoax.
Dr. Wieland does not seemed to have looked very carefully at the decaying wood in this photograph. Double click to see more details.
According to Dr. Wieland the locals are investing a lot of trouble and money for the purposes of future income and glory, and then throwing it away by including this unnecessary room that, according to him, closer inspection and tests will quickly reveal as not being wood.
4. A 20 meter X 10 inches X 10 inches beam in photographs not definitely proven to be any more than 15 feet in length, reducing the total wood required for “the fabrication.”
He suggests a very clever “Hollywood” facade. Still a most difficult accomplishment, and since so easily to be exposed, for what purpose?
5. The impoverished locals were motivated to create this elaborate hoax, and that may explain why Parasut warned away summer climbing, giving his reason due to the dangers from summer melting.
The fallacy here is that Dr. Wieland claims the locals are impoverished, yet they have the means of constructing a great structure. Dr. Wieland acknowledges the dangers of falling rocks from summer melting, yet still suggests that Parasut might be using this to keep folks from climbing in the summer.
6. NAMI claims that fabrication of a structure such as this could hardly be kept secret, but the existence of rumors is consistent with the fact that it was not kept secret.
Rumors are consistent with anything one wishes.
7. Fabrication would not have required superhuman efforts.
Perhaps, but it would have still required great resources and great execution.
8. The scientific reasons: the volcano issue, which I address in my previous post, and the matter of the radiocarbon dating that I have mentioned as troubling the Young Earth Creationists.
I addressed the volcano issue in the previous post, but indeed, this seems the reason why Dr. Wieland supposes this a hoax. It conflicts with his Young Earth Creationists theories concerning the reliability of radiocarbon dating, especially in this period.
There is a fundamental flaw in Dr. Wieland’s hoax theory: though he supposes the impoverished locals did this for money and glory, he ignores the great resources that would have to be invested in the supposed fabrication of the site. Though he believes they also did this for glory, he ignores the flirting period these adventurers would enjoy before their efforts would be exposed as a fabrication. Those sufficiently intelligent and resourceful to perpetuate such a hoax would also be smart enough to see the futility.
As I read Dr. Wieland’s specious reasoning supporting a hoax and these suspicions concerning Parasut, why does it seem an echo from Dr. Randall Price?