What Noah's Ark Scans Claims, and What the Evidence Shows
What Noah's Ark Scans claims, and what the evidence shows
Noah's Ark Scans says the Durupinar formation in eastern Türkiye is the buried remains of Noah's Ark, a man-made structure, not a natural landform. Here is every major claim they've made, as they've stated it, with sources. Under each one is what the evidence shows. Fair is fair: you should hear their case before you hear mine.
Two claims. Seven tests between them. See the full pattern, with sources.
01 It is 100% confirmed as man-made. Their claim
Andrew Jones of Noah's Ark Scans says the radar findings show the formation is man-made, "100 percent confirmed."
No independent team has confirmed it. No peer-reviewed study shows the underground features were built by people. Even the team's own radar lead, Dr. Khosrow Bakhtar, says: "What that original object was, a ship or a spacecraft or what, I do not know."
02 Radar shows corridors, chambers, and levels. Their claim
Their radar survey reports straight lines, right-angle intersections, layered structures, and possible voids. They read these as corridors, compartments, and multiple decks. A post on their social media said the preliminary report "confirms" the formation "is not geological."
Radar shows contrasts in the ground. It can't tell wood from wet clay or rock. The radar is proprietary and the raw data hasn't been released. In 1987, radar specialist Tom Fenner couldn't reproduce the earlier "walls" at all. And in 2020, geologist Lorence Collins reviewed this team's earlier sonar images. His verdict: "The rooms are purely fictitious imaginations."
Sources
- Jerusalem Post, "Researchers claim radar scan reveals 'man-made' structure" (Oct 3, 2026)
- Dr. Mark Hitchcock, “Has Noah’s Ark Been Found? Dr. Hitchcock Examines the Evidence” (video, Oct 2026), quoting the Jerusalem Post and Noah’s Ark Scans’ social post
- Andrew A. Snelling, "Special Report: Amazing 'Ark' Exposé," Creation 14:4 (Sept 1992)
- Lorence G. Collins, "Discussion of the Subsurface Images Project of Noah's Ark, NOAHSARKSCANS.NZ" (Aug 15, 2020)
03 The size matches Genesis. Their claim
They point out the formation is about 164 meters long, close to the roughly 157 meters of a 300-cubit ark.
The length only fits if you use the long Egyptian royal cubit, about 52 cm. With the common cubit, about 45 cm, 300 cubits is about 137 meters. The width doesn't fit either. At its widest the formation is about 50 meters, about double Genesis's 50 cubits. And Genesis describes a tēbâ, a floating chest, not a pointed hull.
Sources
- Greek City Times, "Researchers drill at Turkey's controversial Noah's Ark site" (Oct 1, 2026)
- Dr. Mark Hitchcock, “Has Noah’s Ark Been Found? Dr. Hitchcock Examines the Evidence” (video, Oct 2026), quoting the Jerusalem Post and Noah’s Ark Scans’ social post
04 The shape looks like a ship. Their claim
Seen from the air, the formation has a boat-like outline.
Other boat shapes sit in the same mudflows. The Turkish Air Force photographed three of them on the lower slopes of nearby Lesser Mount Ararat. If shape proves it, Noah had a fleet.
Sources
- Andrew A. Snelling, "Special Report: Amazing 'Ark' Exposé," Creation 14:4 (Sept 1992)
- Dr. Mark Hitchcock, “Has Noah’s Ark Been Found? Dr. Hitchcock Examines the Evidence” (video, Oct 2026), quoting the Jerusalem Post and Noah’s Ark Scans’ social post
05 It sits in "the mountains of Ararat." Their claim
The site lies near Mount Ararat, where many expect the ark to be.
Genesis 8:4 names a region, Urartu, not a peak. Durupinar sits in a valley about 18 miles south of the summit. It isn't on a mountain at all.
06 There is no bedrock underneath. Their claim
Jones says they core drilled at over 12 locations and "did not find bedrock at all." Their X post adds that scans to 50 meters and cores to 20 meters found none.
In 1988, Bayraktutan and Baumgardner cored four holes to 10 meters in the same formation. They hit basalt at 6 to 7 meters in the northern part of the boat shape and strongly folded rock in the southern part (Snelling 1992). No 2026 core logs have been released. And "no bedrock" still doesn't make it a ship.
07 It points the wrong way to be a mudflow. Their claim
Their X post argues the formation's pointed end faces uphill and its rounded end faces downhill, the opposite of mud flowing around a rock.
Their own graphic concedes: "Orientation alone cannot establish whether the formation is natural or man-made." John Morris and John Baumgardner based their verdicts on the rocks and the drill cores, not on which way the tip points. The argument appears in a 2022 pro-Durupinar paper, where it rests on a demonstration "in a backyard sandbox with a hose."
Sources
- Noah's Ark Scans on X, orientation and bedrock post (Oct 14, 2026)
- AJ Koehler, "The Durupinar Site & the Plausibility of its Association with Noah's Ark: A Critical Review" (draft, Jan 2022), Academia.edu
- John D. Morris, "The Search for Noah's Ark: Status 1992," Institute for Creation Research (Sept 1, 1992)
08 There is three times more organic matter inside. Their claim
Jones cites a 2024 soil survey that found about three times more organic matter inside the formation than just outside it.
Jones himself cautions: "Organic matter also accumulates naturally in soils and slope deposits." Differences in soil, moisture, and plant cover inside the outline can do the same thing.
09 The drill hit something hard. It could be wood. Their claim
In one hole, the drill bit broke on a hard layer about 4 to 5 meters down. They say it could be petrified or mineralized wood.
Jones says they don't yet know what it is. It could also be a hard rock block in the debris. Lab results are expected this winter. Nothing has been identified as wood.
10 The dates fit Noah. Their claim
Samples analyzed in 2023 were dated to 3,500 to 5,000 years old.
The vice rector of the university behind those dates, Prof. Faruk Kaya, said: "With the dating, it is not possible to say that the ship is here." No new dates have come from the 2026 cores.
11 The pottery may be pre-flood. Their claim
Pottery has been found near the formation, and some reports floated new 2026 fragments as possibly pre-flood.
Earlier pottery ranges from the Chalcolithic to the Iron Age. The 2026 fragments hadn't been dated as of mid-October. Pottery nearby shows people lived there. It doesn't make a hill a hull.
Sources
- ProPakistani, "Researchers claim Prophet Nuh's Ark location 100% confirmed" (Sept 27, 2026)
- Answers in Genesis video, “‘100% Confirmed’: Did They Actually Just Find Noah’s Ark?” (Oct 2026)
12 This will rewrite the textbooks. Their claim
The project's fundraising director, Lauren Witzke, said the findings could force universities to rewrite curricula and challenge Darwin's theory of evolution.
That is a claim about consequences, not evidence. The same campaign was raising $600,000 and the team sells tours of $1,100 to $3,600 a person. Extraordinary claims need independent verification first.
Their case rests on radar no one else can check, drilling logs no one has seen, and lab results that haven't come back. That isn't a discovery yet. It's a hypothesis. Show us wood, deep in the formation, confirmed by an independent lab, and we'll publish a new score. Gladly.