Key Sites:

1.Mount Ararat (Ağrı Dağı), Eastern Turkey: Most traditional and popular location

• Why Here? Genesis 8:4 says the Ark came to rest "on the mountains of Ararat." Historically seen as the site of Noah's Ark. 

• Claims: Many explorers (James Irwin, NAMI, Ed Davis) claim to have seen wooden structures or remains here.

• Status: Still the #1 site people search but it is politically and physically hard to access. No confirmed archaeological finds.

Arial view of Ararat: Courtesy of NBC News

2.Durupinar Site, near Doğubayazıt, Turkey (15 miles south of Ararat): Famous boat-shaped formation

• Discovered: 1959 by Turkish army captain Ilhan Durupınar via aerial photos.

• Claims: Ron Wyatt and David Fasold popularized the idea that this was the true Noah’s Ark.

-Boat-shaped outline ~500 feet long.

-"Petrified wood," iron rivets, ballast stones.

• Criticism: Geologists argue it’s a natural formation.

• Status: Site is open to tourists but not recognized by mainstream archaeology.

Durupinar Site: Courtesy of Wikipedia

3.Mount Judi (Cudi Dağı), Southeastern Turkey: Another ancient Ark location, specifically in Islamic texts

• Why here? The Quran (Surah Hud 11:44) and some early Christian texts say the Ark landed on Mount Judi.

• Claims: George Hagopian (1920s) claimed as a child to see the Ark with his uncle here.

-Based on local legends and ancient ruins.

• Status: Less explored due to political instability and historical texts support this more than physical evidence.

Judi rock formations believed to be ark remains: Courtesy of Stephen Compton blog

4.Mount Suleiman, Alborz Mountains, Iran: Alternative theory promoted by Bob Cornuke (2006)

• Claim: The Ark landed in Iran, not Turkey.

• Reasoning: Reinterprets “mountains of Ararat” as broader region.

• Findings: Large wooden beams, stone structure remains.

• Criticism: Considered fringe or unsubstantiated; no peer-reviewed evidence.

• Status: Rarely accepted by scholars.

Suleiman rock formation (Black middle rock): Courtesy of The Base Institute

2.Ron Wyatt (1977–1990s):

• Claim: Discovered a boat-shaped formation at Durupinar, near Mount Ararat.

• Evidence: Claimed to find petrified wood, metal fittings, and impressions resembling ship structures.

• Criticism: Most archaeologists consider his methods non-scientific and his claims unsubstantiated.

• Note: The Durupınar site is seen as a natural geological formation.

Wyatt in front of Durupinar site: Courtesy of Decision Magazine

3.NAMI (Hong Kong-based Christian group) 2010:

• Claim: Found wooden compartments at 13,000 feet on Mount Ararat.

• Evidence: Video footage and wood samples dated to around 4,800 years old.

• Criticism: Accusations emerged that the site was planted or staged with wood brought in from elsewhere, with Turkish researchers calling it a hoax.

Member of NAMI underground in Ararat Site: Courtesy of The Christian Science Monitor: 

4.Agri Dagi and Satellite Scans (2000s–present):

• Modern Efforts: Used satellite imagery, ground-penetrating radar, and drone technology to identify anomalies under ice or rock on Mount Ararat.

• Findings: Some interesting geological formations, but there is no confirmed archaeological evidence of a large ship.

Arial view of Ararat Summit: Courtesy of NASA