As fantastic as it would be for someone to actually find the thing, I have to say that the likelihood of it happening truly fits the definition of the word "fantastic".
fan⋅tas⋅tic [fan-tas-tik] Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. conceived or appearing as if conceived by an unrestrained imagination; odd and remarkable; bizarre; grotesque: fantastic rock formations; fantastic designs.
2. fanciful or capricious, as persons or their ideas or actions: We never know what that fantastic creature will say next.
3. imaginary or groundless in not being based on reality; foolish or irrational: fantastic fears.
4. extravagantly fanciful; marvelous.
5. incredibly great or extreme; exorbitant: to spend fantastic sums of money.
6. highly unrealistic or impractical; outlandish: a fantastic scheme to make a million dollars betting on horse races.
7. Informal. extraordinarily good: a fantastic musical.
Source.
Which is not to say that it doesn't exist, I just think that if Noah's famous vessel did in fact exist at one point, and was somewhere on Mt. Ararat, it should have been discovered there by now. It's interesting to be sure, but after all the hoopla over the years, including the dubious "Ararat Anomaly", I would need some real convincing. There have been more than a couple of quasi-archeologists who have made a career of generating this kind of hype over Noah's Ark. A prime example of this would be embodied in the work of
Ron Wyatt. His claims regarding his discoveries of other biblical relics are doubtful at best.
Time will tell, though, and I would
love to be proved wrong. Another area of interest is the
Durupinar site, if anyone would like to check out an alternative location.
David Fasold, an on again off again colleague of Wyatt's, had wrestled with the validity of this site until seemingly convincing himself on his deathbed:
During the 1990s, Fasold was caught between three opposing camps that derided his interest in the site. On one side were orthodox creationists who believed the ark could only lay on Mt. Ararat; the second camp was comprised of Wyatt and others who continued their research and reported significant discoveries; the third camp included skeptical geologists and biblical minimalists who called the site a hoax.[11] After a few scientific expeditions to the Durupınar site that included drillings and excavation in the 1990s, Fasold began to have doubts that the Durupınar formation was Noah's ark. He visited the site with geologist Ian Plimer in September 1994, and in a subsequent interview noted his change of mind saying "I believe this may be the oldest running hoax in history. I think we have found what the ancients said was the Ark, but this structure is not Noah's Ark."[12] At other times he claimed that the site was only what the ancients believed was Ziusudra's 'ark of reeds'.[13] 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.[14] In April 1997 during his testimony in an Australian court case Fasold repudiated his belief in the Ark, and stated that he regarded the claim as "absolute BS".[15][16][17]
Creationist Ark researchers such as Don Patten, David Allen Deal[7] and Australian friend and biographer June Dawes reported that before his 1998 death Fasold again claimed the Durupınar site to be the location of the ark. Dawes wrote:
He [Fasold] kept repeating that no matter what the experts said, there was too much going for the [Durupınar] site for it to be dismissed. He remained convinced it was the fossilized remains of Noah's Ark.[18]
Source.
Of the millions of examples I could have posted, I chose this one because it seems to truly embody the tortured past this subject has weathered. The possibility of the Ark being found is a dream that compels many. The motivations are varied, but the outcome of the Ark itself has always remained the same--undiscovered. Aside from one passage in the bible ("the ark rested upon the mountain
s of Ararat") no one has ever produced compelling evidence that the Ark is on Mt. Ararat.
Richard Bright, who will be accompanying Randall Price on this expedition, has written several books about his research and travels regarding the ark. He's been to Ararat so many times looking for the thing that one has to wonder: If he is so knowledgeable and convinced of it's whereabouts, why can't he just produce the thing already?
Regarding Randall Price himself, his ministry/
webpage/and books seem to be centered around the more theatrical aspects of the Christian bible.
Now I'm not saying that this guy or his partner are huxters, I think that they may truly believe in their latest venture. I am just not convinced that we are going to glean anything new from their upcoming expedition aside from a new book about what they didn't find. These guys are not the first of their kind. Look up Dr. Friedrich Parrot, James Bryce, James Irwin, Daniel McGivern, Ahmet Ali Arslan, Bob Cornuke, Georgie Hagopian, Ed Davis, David Duckworth, Fernand Navarra, and David Balsiger. It may be unfair to lump Price and Bright in with
all of their predecessors, but I'm just trying to make the point that this is nothing new, and not to get your hopes up too high. Searching for Noah's Ark has been a successful and popular enterprise among bored rich people, attention hounds, legitimate academics, self proclaimed academics, and outright liars (look up George Jammal) for over a century. Just like the Lochness Monster.
Again, I would truly love to be proven wrong this time, and I would be happy to let anyone rub this post in my face as a result. I just don't think it is going to happen.