Re: Dr. Norman Geisler: Noah's Ark Found???
Posted: Fri Oct 23, 2015 7:37 pm
If that is the case would you agree with my assertion that there is nothing in Scripture to support an altitude of 12,000 feet?Philip wrote:OK, HOW high the water might have come is speculation.
Which means that a height of 12,000 feet is not where Scripture says the ark came to rest.
Which is still unsupported by Scripture, history, archaeology, and science.But one thing is wrong with your figures. It's not mere height above sea level we're talking about, but the differential between the Alluvial Plain (1,000 meters/3280 feet) and the site location (about 12,000 feet). This means that the site is not over two miles high, but rather approximately 8,720 feet, or 1.65 miles over the PLAIN.
In fact Rich Deem's article has the following observation which drives this point home even further.
Rich's observation above shows that 12,000 feet is far above the upper altitude limit that is indicated by Scripture itself.If the ark had come to rest on the top of Mount Ararat, this would be at 17,000 foot elevation. Olive trees (and every other tree) do not grow at 17,000 feet. In fact, you will not find olive trees growing much above 5,000 feet. Therefore, we know from the Bible that the ark did not come to rest on or near the top of Mount Ararat, but probably somewhere on the foothills of the mountain.
12,000 feet is not only unsupported by Scripture, Rich shows that 12,000 feet is actually contradicted by Scripture.
In Christ