The Hong-Kong based organization Noah’s Ark Ministries International (NAMI) announced in April that they had discovered Noah’s Ark. Their press release included brief video clips showing wooden beams of the alleged ark. Yet many noted major problems with their purported discovery. These suspicions appeared to be confirmed with the release two weeks ago of a letter written by two Turkish brothers who confessed to constructing “the ark” for what they thought was a movie set.
The latest turn in the saga is that NAMI has announced that the confession sent to Randall Price was forged. They have a statement by the brothers claiming that they never wrote the letter.
A few observations:
1. An outside observer can hardly judge as to what the truth is with regard to the letter. It’s certainly possible that someone forged the letter. It should be noted that the letter is in Turkish, and since all “ark hunters” are outside Turkey, its creation would have required more than a casual effort. It did strike me originally that the signatures appear to have been signed by the same person, though that might not be significant if one or both was illiterate.
2. NAMI clearly believes their reputation is on the line, as is apparent from the effort they have taken to refute the letter. Their response is currently the front page on their website.
3. NAMI has spent a lot of money in their story and they expect to reap a fortune with the production of future “documentaries” and souvenirs. An outside investigator would certainly want to consider the possibility that they invested additional money into the Turkish brothers so that they would deny
writing the letter.
5. NAMI essentially claims that Price forged the letter. They write, “His actions have been completely against the basic principles of a true professing Christian and defying the law.” Did he defy the law by attacking their work or by posting the letter? Clearly they intend to suggest that he personally was involved in its forgery. I believe that their charge is absolutely baseless, but they are now on record for recognizing the difference between truth and error as well as the judgment men face for their actions.
6. The determination that the letter is a forgery does not constitute evidence for the validity of the discovery.