Monday, August 5, 2013

The Mystery of Mount Judi...again

Mount Judi

I get many comments telling me gleefully that I am going to burn in hell for an eternity. The irony of a merciful God torturing innocent people for the "sin" of not believing in Him being presumably so massive as to be invisible...

"What dog? Where?"

Here's one directed at atheists in general, but you get the picture
Atheists are unequivocally the STUPIDEST people on earth. Satan has you by your throats. I give you glad tidings of a burning fire whose fuel is men and stones and whose fire is 70 times the fire of this earth to burn in for eternity if you die as atheists.
This particular loon has attached his vitriolic bile to a video on a topic beloved of the miracle seekers: Noah's Ark and Mount Judi.

The Qur'an states that the resting place of Noah's Ark is not Mount Ararat as in the Bible, but Mount Judi. 
"And the word was spoken: "O earth! swallow up thy waters! And, O sky, cease [thy rain]!" And the water sank into the earth, and the will [of God] was done, and the ark came to rest on Mount Judi. And the word was spoken: "Away with these evil doing folk!" (Quran, 11:44)."
Miracle seekers such as the one who posted the video above (viewed over a million times) are spreading the lie that there is archaeological evidence of a large boat on top of this mountain.

There is no such evidence. What there is is a striking natural rock formation in the shape of a boat. One can easily understand how ancient peoples (before the advent of modern geological knowledge and computer-aided surveying techniques) might have interpreted the structure as the remains of an ancient vessel. However, geologists have studied the site and concluded that it is entirely natural. Here is the introduction to a study of the site by Lorence Gene Collins (Department of Geological Sciences,  California State University, Northridge, California)  
A natural rock structure near Dogubayazit, Turkey, has been misidentified as Noah's Ark. Microscopic studies of a supposed iron bracket show that it is derived from weathered volcanic minerals. Supposed metal-braced walls are natural concentrations of limonite and magnetite in steeply inclined sedimentary layers in the limbs of a doubly plunging syncline. Supposed fossilized gopherwood bark is crinkled metamorphosed peridotite. Fossiliferous limestone, interpreted as cross cutting the syncline, preclude the structure from being Noah's Ark because these supposed "Flood" deposits are younger than the "Ark." Anchor stones at Kazan (Arzap) are derived from local andesite and not from Mesopotamia.
And here is the conclusion:
On the basis of the information given above, I suggest the following geologic history for the origin of the structure. Rocks in the supposed Ark, which now conform to the U-shape of the syncline, were deposited initially in a horizontal or near-horizontal position. These rocks were composed of tiny grains of clay, quartz, calcite, anthophyllite, and local concentrations of ilmenitic magnetite as well as poorly sorted pebbles of andesite and basalt. They were products of weathering and erosion of volcanic rocks in nearby mountains and were transported by streams and deposited in a basin. Subsequently, these layers were compacted into rock and folded into a doubly plunging syncline. A marine sea advanced over the folded rocks and eroded and cut a channel in which fossiliferous limestone was later deposited. This was followed by uplift and further erosion that removed most of the limestone and scoured the fold to create the boat-shaped profile. Finally, swelling clays (bentonite) in mud in surrounding mountains caused a large landslide to occur. This landslide carried disoriented blocks of rock and mud that were channeled around the synclinal structure (Figure 5). Some time early in this history, following uplift, the limonite concretions ("iron brackets") were formed in the sediments, both inside and outside the synclinal structure, as ground water from rain and melting snow reacted with ilmenitic magnetite (and pyrite) granules along bedding planes and fracture zones.
Evidence from microscopic studies and photo analyses demonstrates that the supposed Ark near Dogubayazit is a completely natural rock formation. It cannot have been Noah's Ark nor even a man-made model. It is understandable why early investigators falsely identified it. The unusual boat-shaped structure would so catch their attention that an eagerness to be persons who either discovered Noah's Ark or confirmed its existence would tend to override caution. 
As I've posited before in previous posts, the expert view that the structure on Mount Judi is an entirely natural and completely understandable structure easily explained by geologists should provoke some interesting questions among those who believe in the literal truth of the myth of Noah.

i. Doesn't the astounding coincidence that there is a striking ancient natural rock formation in the shape of a boat on the very mountain where Muhammad said Noah's Ark came to rest cause you to wonder if Muhammad might have known about the site? It's not even as if the miracle seekers can claim no-one knew about the site at the time of Muhammad.
Here's what Bill Crouse in Archaeology and Biblical Research,Noah's Ark: Its Final Berth Vol. 5, No. 3. Summer, 1992 has to say about it:
Cudi Dagh overlooks the all-important Mesopotamian plain and is notable for its many archaeological ruins in and around the mountain. There are also many references to it in ancient history.13 Sennacherib (700 B.C.), the Assyrian king, carved rock reliefs of himself on the side of the mountain (see photo #2).14 The Nestorians (a sect of Christianity) built several monasteries around the mountain including one on the summit called "The Cloister of the Ark". It was destroyed by lightning in 766 A.D.
He goes on to note how well-known the structure still is locally:

The Muslims later built a mosque on the site. In 1910, Gertrude Bell explored the area and found a stone structure still at the summit with the shape of a ship (see photo #3) called by the locals "Sefinet Nebi Nuh" "The Ship of Noah". 

(How strange then that modern miracle seekers seem to be under the impression that this site has just been discovered and thus miraculously confirms the Qur'an...)

We thus have a remarkable natural rock formation familiar to the local inhabitants from well before Muhammad's time and mistakenly identified by them as Noah's Ark appearing in the Qur'an. Hmmm.

ii. Let's for one moment assume the geologists are all mistaken and that the strange rock formation is a miraculously preserved outline of the Ark of Noah. We now have to believe that the ark came to rest after the local flood on a mountain over 7,000 feet tall. 
So flood water was at least 7,000 feet deep but the flood was local? Really?Once more I simply ask why it is that so many people seem to lose the ability to think logically and rationally when it comes to religion. 

Perhaps I know the answer a comment on a previous post said so chillingly:
 Allah Almighty has revealed in the Holy Quran that Noah's Ark rested on Mount Judi So that is the fact. THe Quran can never ever be wrong as it is word of Allah, the omnipotent.

It's a fact. No point in researching or thinking for yourselves.


  1. Tell us how the ark contained all the earth's myriad creatures and the food needed for them? There should have been a famine after flood and we should have been left with no herbivores at all.

  2. A flood of a depth of 7,000 feet would put 80-90% of the world below the water...
    If the ark really did come to rest on a mountain 7,000 feet tall then calling it a "local" flood is the biggest lie I've ever heard!
    7,000 is snow covered most of the year!

    1. Perhaps the ground has moved since Noah's time

  3. Read David Fasold's The Ark of Noah.
    He researched it, concluded it was real and he's not a Muslim!

  4. In 1996 Fasold coauthored a paper with geologist Lorence Collins entitled "Bogus 'Noah's Ark' from Turkey Exposed as a Common Geologic Structure" that concluded the boat-shaped formation was a curious upswelling of mud that happened to look like a boat. He has since been quoted as saying the site is complete "BS".

  5. I can actually offer something of a shortcut here. The book:"the invention of the Jews" by Shlomo Sands (or something along those lines) goes through the chronology of archeological dig after archeological dig looking for all of the events that happened in the Old Testament (like the exodus for example, the arc and so on and so forth) and time and time again, in spite of scientific knowledge, technology and University Campuses looking for evidence of "what happened" - they never, ever, EVER found anything to support any of the stories - so you can quite quickly and easily write off most of the stories that are in agreement between the two books. No evidence for them. At all.

  6. Thanks Jasmine.
    I'll try and trace the book - sounds an interesting read!