An Ark in the Dark

Children playing near the base of Mt. Ararat

"Besides learning to see, there is another art to be learned - not to see what is not." (Maria Mitchell, 1818-1889, American Astronomer)

Jive Turkey?

The other night I had a conversation with someone concerning archaeology and the Biblical record. This person claimed that Noah’s Ark was found on Mt. Ararat, but that the Turkish government has closed off the site and refuses to publicize the findings or exhibit them for fear of having masses of foreign non-Muslim pilgrims invading their borders, and/or degrading the site where the Ark is reputed to have been discovered. There was also the claim that the area around Mt. Ararat is threatened by Kurdish rebels, and therefore not safe to visit. I do not know if the story is true, but before I even begin to look for answers, there are a whole lot of questions I have ask first. One cannot just make assumptions without getting the background on the whole story, and without that background, how do you know the idea makes any sense at all?

It is ironic that so much evidence of major Biblical events remains lacking, considering all the attention that has been paid to them these last 2000 years. It makes sense that anyone who has such evidence would come forth immediately. Now, why would the government of Turkey hide such a find? Moreover, why wouldn’t the scientist who discovered what could be the greatest piece of evidence for the Great Flood ever found, not publicize it? Can you imagine how much money the American Christians would be willing to pay for even a sliver of that ship? Does one think that the Turkish government is so honest and uncorrupted as to not wish to profit from such a find? In fact, such a discovery would make Turkey a foreign policy darling overnight, not to mention all the billions of dollars that would come from tourism to the country. The Turks are not as backward as some might imagine. The Egyptians, who are much more radical in their distaste for western society, have no problem making lots of money showing off Cheops, so why would I believe some crazy story about the Turks deliberately hiding artifacts?

One would also think that the Turks, if the story were true, would only need one reason not to display the Ark or allow visits, yet there seem to be at least three, and two of them, as I have shown, make no sense at all. The third, I cannot confirm or deny.

(UPDATE! Facts about Mt. Ararat: On 1st of November 2004 Ararat Mountain and surroundings were declared as the 35th National Park of Turkey by the Government so it's believed that it will attract more visitors and help to the local economy as well. Ararat is a dormant volcano, whose peak is 1565 metres above sea level. The last probable eruption may have occurred in 1840. The upper 3^rd is always covered in ice and snow. It seems that Mt. Ararat is not off limits to anyone, and the Turkish government is actually encouraging visits to boost tourism.

http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/asia/trlarge.htm

On this map one can also see that Mt. Ararat is far to the north for it to be contested by the Kurdish rebels. Former unrest was in disputes with Russia, which have long since been settled. This is why we skeptics do our homework. We’re finicky about facts. So much for the conspiracy theories.)

Going Underground

This reminds me of the story told in yeshivas which claims that the vessels from the Second Temple (and possibly the 1^st) are now cached in the basement of the Vatican, hidden for all time. It appears that we Jews must believe that there is a grand conspiracy to erase any authentic piece of evidence that confirms our history in order to cope with its loss. Yet, why would these conspirators hide the very same evidence that would also vindicate their own claims to divinity, which, in case no one noticed until now, are based on the authenticity of Judaism? By bringing forth these artifacts, the Vatican would reveal itself as friendly, not to mention all the money it could make off the exhibit and scientific inquiry! I have never known the Roman Catholic Church to turn down the chance to make lots of money and/or prove the naysayers, skeptics, or heretics wrong. They have done so with the Ossuary and Shroud of Turin, going to great lengths to create artifacts and exaggerate controversy for publicity and money. I see no logical reason the Catholic Church would hide anything. They have never had any shame in that regard until now, and to assume that they have kept these things secret for over 2000 years, a period older than the Roman Church itself, is nonsense. If they had it, we’d already be sick of hearing about it.

Another sort of proof of this comes from the Second World War. Had Hitler known of such treasures, and it is likely that he would have, since many Nazis were close with the higher-ups in the Roman Church, he certainly would have made a spectacle of his find, rubbing the noses of the Allies, Jews, and everyone else in his triumph. Hitler, may his name be erased and forgotten, would never have passed up the chance to show his dominion over the Jews, and would have yearned to mimic the exploits of the Caesar who carried the Vessels and the Ark of the Covenant off to Rome in ancient times. Yet, this didn’t happen either.

Cycling

I realize that there are always going to be holes in archaeological record, much as we have in the fossil record. It is a given that there most likely will not be hard evidence for or against some the claims of Biblical historicity. I am okay with that. So how then, do I decide what is believable and what isn’t? By what criteria to I decide for myself that evidence, or excuse for lack thereof, is substantial enough to believe? This really boils down to my view and interpretation of history overall. It is not a complicated process, and it relies on something we (and most others mammals) use every day to sort out the world around us. It is called ‘pattern recognition’.

I will illustrate how I use this by debunking a claim used to confirm the Revelation at Sinai.

Religious Jews claim that they know that God revealed Himself on Mt. Sinai in the same way that we know that George Washington was once president of the United States. To them it is simply a matter of history being passed down from one generation to another. At first glance, its not a bad comparison, but it falls apart under the scrutiny of pattern recognition. (There is not one shred of evidence to support the claim that 2.5 million people were ever there at anytime for any reason. If there were, I might not be a heretic, and this wouldn’t be an issue.)

Pattern recognition means that early man was able to piece together events in his surroundings that behaved in cycles, and learned how to adapt his own behavior to those cycles. So, this recognition of migration patterns, the seasons, tides, and other natural phenomena became useful tools for man’s survival. Pattern recognition is the fundamental principle behind science and history as well, and I apply it freely where no evidence proves it an untenable assumption to make.

History repeats itself. The human being, whether acting alone or in large groups, still behaves pretty much the same way he did 6500 years ago. We have no reason to assume that the physiology and accompanying psychological make-up of humanity has changed one bit over recorded history. We witness the same sort of tyrants, despots, wars, slavery, lusts, greed, and petty hatreds today that we have seen throughout our short history, this in spite of all our noble efforts to put those horrible traits to rest. The cycle continues. There are few one-time events in human history, because we are all wired alike and prone to the same sort of pitfalls and societal disasters.

When the believer tells me that this ‘one-time only and never seen before or after event’ of Mt. Sinai is historical because it mimics the way we know about George Washington, I then apply the process to it. We know that countries undergo colonialism and political turmoil, often ending up changing governments and electing new leaders. There are few, if any, nations on the planet that can lay claim to not having this happened. It is an event that is repeated over and over, and all over. So, if you tell me that there was a revolution in a certain country and that a specific leader arose from the revolt, I have no reason to doubt the event, even though I may not have all the details. I still know that it is something the people do and reasonable to accept.

With the Great Flood or the Revelation at Sinai, however, these are claimed to be one-time and non-repeatable events, and therefore, without hard evidence to support the claim, the belief is based on a very weak hearsay. There are no other events to compare them, so we can make no real assessment of their possibility let alone the details on who, when, or where. If I don’t apply some standard to evaluating historical claims, in these cases based on what’s most likely or reasonable, then I am apt to believe anything that comes my way. It is this same pattern recognition that I also use to debunk the claims of conspiracy on the parts of governments or individuals to withhold evidence of Biblical history or supernatural occurrences. None of it makes any sense.

Men Overboard!

There are various flood stories from around the globe and at different periods. It seems that Nature inflicts the same sort of catastrophe on everybody at one time or another. Believers claim that since there are similar stories of a flood covering the entire Earth, and only few surviving to replenish the planet, then it must be true because everyone seems to agree on the basic gist of the story without ever having communicated with one another.

Once again, we go back to pattern recognition to sort this out. Have most seaside, lakeside, riverside, and monsoon-region cultures suffered massive flooding, tidal waves, or tsunamis? Did these ancient cultures see what they believed to be their entire world destroyed by water? Was there massive death and suffering? Did the possibility of that catastrophe leave an indelible impression on the people? Could it have become the stuff of legend? Were the various peoples of the same basic physiological and psychological constitution, and susceptible to the same fear and worries? Absolutely! So, how therefore, in the absence of hard evidence, can one claim a world-wide one-time event based upon the fact of a similar story when the core explanation of the story itself could be attributed to localized, every-day sort of causes that do not require a global event.

Keeping It Real

Reality is not something that we always have a handle on. Even in physics, the Uncertainty Principle pits our ability to know against our interaction with the natural world. Yet, our lack of knowing some things should never translate into the blind acceptance of all things improbable, especially when accompanied by lack of hard evidence or based a method of discovery not suitable for testable, repeatable every-day events.

Personally, I don’t see much point in arguing over details if the events themselves are improbable, lack evidence, and/or can be explained in natural terms. Being able to whip the up the necessary skepticism of supernatural claims when needed is a healthy thing, and can save loads of time and effort. As everyone knows, I’m all about laziness.

"Skepticism is the chastity of the intellect." (George Santayana, 1863-1952)