By Staff, Paleontological Research Corporation

Harvard University educated archaeologist and director of the Paleontological Research Corporation, Dr. Joel Klenck, reported there was archaeological merit to a large wood structure and cave discovered near the summit of Mount Ararat by a Kurdish guide, Ahmet “Parasut” Ertugrul. In 2010, Oktay Belli, Professor of Eurasian Archaeology at Istanbul University, hailed the finds as the “greatest discovery.” However, Klenck states these archaeological sites confront severe bias. He adds, “If an ancient wood structure was found in Alaska and associated with Clovis artifacts, the site would be celebrated; however, because this structure is found on Mount Ararat and associated with Noah’s ark, the discoveries are being attacked.”

“This is the only case I am aware of where a tourism company has actively campaigned to prevent research…”

Klenck notes that a small tourism company in eastern Turkey, Murat Camping, has acquired hundreds of thousands of dollars from groups searching for Noah’s Ark and is trying to discredit or harass those supporting research at actual archaeological sites on Mount Ararat. He states, “Murat Camping and ark searchers who are led by this organization have reported that Professor Belli and Turkish government officials are supporting a hoax.” Klenck counters that these allegations are false as the research area on Mount Ararat comprises “factual archaeological sites.” He continues that Randall Price and others raise large sums of money from various churches and private donors, who utilize Murat Camping for their ark expeditions. He states, “Once the Ararat sites become state-approved excavations in Turkey, many can volunteer to work at the Ararat sites or study the artifacts in museums or archaeological journals…meanwhile Murat Camping stands to lose significant monies.” He continues: “This is the only case I am aware of where a tourism company has actively campaigned to prevent research at actual archaeological sites and vilify and harass archaeologists while attempting to preserve income from bogus expeditions.”

The archaeologist states that particular creationist communities from the United States and Australia are also adamantly opposed to the discoveries. He notes, “A group of creationists have built a theoretical framework and assumed that Noah’s ark would have dinosaur bones, Early Stone Age tools, Neanderthals, be completely fossilized or found between Cretaceous and Tertiary geological strata. That the large wood structure on Mount Ararat exhibits an assemblage that appears to be mostly from the Late Epipaleolithic Period (13,100-9,600 B.C.), roughly at the end of the Stone Age, is troubling to this group since the data contradicts their assumptions.” He is astounded that creationist communities that once desired the discovery of a large wood object on Mount Ararat are now disparaging actual archaeological sites at this locale.

Further, he remarks that many professional archaeologists have surprisingly followed these narrow creationist critiques and are ignoring the Ararat discoveries. Klenck notes, “Nearly all archaeologists today have been educated in secular academic institutions, where accounts in the Torah are treated as fabrications or myths. Also, the “New Archaeology”, a movement that was very popular in earlier decades, developed by the late Lewis Binford, disfavored using ancient manuscripts to explain archaeological assemblages.” “Now, that there is an ancient large wood structure on Mount Ararat that is allegedly associated with Noah’s ark,” he remarks, “most archaeologists are disregarding the sites without evaluating the data, despite that these locales contain archaeological features of great antiquity with well preserved assemblages.” In addition, he states, “Professional archaeologists do not realize that the biggest critics of the archaeological sites on Mount Ararat also object to the scientific discipline of archaeology and most archaeological research.”

… ethnic bias is affecting the analysis of the sites…

The researcher also suggests that ethnic bias is affecting the analysis of the sites: “The Anatolian and Chinese discoverers are being described as gullible, unintelligent, frauds and alcoholics while their harshest critics, of mostly European descent, are described as credible.” He responds, “These depictions are untrue, unfair and prejudicial.” The archaeologist adds that news organizations have publicized these attitudes without noting these critics acquire substantial monies from meritless expeditions and possess their own personal or philosophical reasons for discounting the archaeological sites on Mount Ararat.

Klenck remarks, “Archaeological theories are based on facts and evidence and not on beliefs or faith. With the Ararat discoveries, we have well preserved archaeological sites and assemblages that appear to be from a period associated with the transition to farming, plant and animal domestication and stratified societies.” He concludes that although the association of the wood structure with Noah’s ark will be a much debated issue, the Ararat sites represent discoveries that are important to our knowledge of archaeology and prehistory.

Dr. Joel Klenck is the director of the Paleontological Research Corporation.

Originally published on the website, Paleorc.

Copyright © Acts News Network, Inc.

By admin