Noah’s Ark Claim in Turkey Draws Skepticism From Scholars and Scientists

Toronto — A renewed claim that the remains of Noah’s Ark have been identified in eastern Turkey is drawing scrutiny from scholars and scientists, who say the evidence falls short of accepted archaeological standards.

The claim centers on the Durupınar site, a boat-shaped geological formation located about 30 kilometers south of Mount Ararat’s summit. Andrew Jones, founder of the research group Noah’s Ark Scans, said recent ground-penetrating radar (GPR) surveys revealed subsurface patterns resembling tunnels, chambers, and right angles — features he suggested could indicate a man-made structure.

In an interview with international media in April 2026, Mr. Jones described the formation as potentially the remnants of “a large vessel that has decayed and been buried over time.” He also pointed to differences in soil composition and traces of organic material as supporting indicators.

But the interpretation has been met with swift skepticism.

Wesley Huff, a Christian apologist and doctoral candidate in New Testament studies at Wycliffe College, University of Toronto, said the findings do not constitute credible archaeological evidence.

“I affirm the historical and theological significance of the Noah narrative,” Mr. Huff said in a public statement. “However, the formation in Anatolia is almost certainly not the Ark.”

Mr. Huff raised concerns about the research methodology and expertise involved, noting that the team behind the claim does not appear to include credentialed field archaeologists. He also cautioned against overreliance on GPR data without excavation, emphasizing that such technology can suggest anomalies underground but cannot definitively identify ancient wooden structures.

He further noted that the biblical reference to “the mountains of Ararat” in Genesis 8:4 refers broadly to the ancient region of Urartu, rather than a specific peak known today as Mount Ararat — a designation that emerged in medieval sources.

Geologists have long maintained that the Durupınar formation is a طبيعي syncline — a folded sedimentary rock structure formed through geological processes. Studies published since the late 20th century have found no evidence of human construction at the site.

Notably, even organizations that support a literal interpretation of the Genesis flood account, including Answers in Genesis and Creation Ministries International, have dismissed the Durupınar site as evidence of Noah’s Ark. They cite the absence of verifiable materials such as preserved timber or artifacts consistent with an ancient vessel.

Responding to the criticism, Noah’s Ark Scans said its work remains preliminary and independent of earlier controversial claims, including those associated with the late amateur explorer Ron Wyatt. The group said it has not concluded definitively that the structure is the Ark but argued that the subsurface patterns merit further investigation.

Despite decades of exploration in the Mount Ararat region, no findings have been widely accepted by the scientific community as physical evidence of Noah’s Ark. Previous claims have repeatedly failed to withstand peer review or independent verification.

The latest debate underscores a longstanding tension between faith-based interpretations and empirical inquiry — and the high bar that extraordinary historical claims must meet to gain scientific acceptance. []