Ground-Penetrating Radar Detects Hidden Structures at Noah’s Ark Formation in Turkey

A California-based research team believes they may have found something extraordinary buried beneath the rugged terrain of eastern Turkey. Ground-penetrating radar scans have revealed underground structures at a formation that has puzzled observers for more than six decades. What lies beneath the surface could rewrite how we understand one of history’s most debated archaeological mysteries.

Noah’s Ark Scan, an independent research group, recently announced findings from their examination of the Durupınar site. Located 29 kilometers south of Mount Ararat, the formation has sparked debate since its discovery in 1959. Now, advanced radar technology has detected angular structures, layered formations, and chemical signatures that suggest something more than random geology.

Radar Scans Reveal Hidden Structures

Independent researcher Andrew Jones leads the team using ground-penetrating radar to probe beneath the boat-shaped formation. His scans detected a tunnel measuring 13 meters long running through the center of the structure. But the tunnel represents just one element of what the radar revealed.

Scans recorded three distinct layers underground. Each layer sits one beneath the other in a configuration that captured the team’s attention. Angular structures appear at depths reaching six meters below the surface. Jones and his colleagues interpret these structures as possible compartments beneath what might be a deck arrangement.

Jones described their findings in an interview with Yeni Şafak. “We have detected some interesting things,” he said, choosing his words with measured caution.

Analysis of the radar data shows what the team describes as central and lateral corridors running through the buried structure. For Jones and his colleagues, the patterns do not match what random geological processes typically produce. Instead, the configurations suggest deliberate construction.

Soil Analysis Produces Unexpected Chemical Signatures

William Crabtree brings soil science expertise to the research team. His analysis of samples collected from 22 points across the site produced results that caught his attention. Organic matter inside the formation measures double that of the surrounding soil. Potassium levels register 40 percent higher within the structure compared to areas just outside it.

Crabtree explained the significance of these measurements in technical terms. “If you know soil science—as I am a soil scientist—you will understand that potassium levels, organic matter, and pH can all be affected by the decomposition of organic materials. If this was a wooden vessel and the wood had rotted over time, we would expect to see increased potassium levels, changes in pH, and higher organic content—and that’s exactly what we find.”

Chemical footprints in soil can tell stories about what once existed above or within the earth. Decomposed organic materials leave distinct signatures. Potassium concentrations increase. pH values shift. Organic content rises above baseline levels.

For a soil scientist examining these patterns, the data points toward organic decomposition on a substantial scale. Whether that decomposition resulted from a massive wooden structure or some other source remains the question driving the team’s continued investigation.

Visual Clues Add Another Layer to the Mystery

Observations above ground complement what the radar detected below. Grass growing within the formation’s boundaries displays different coloring compared to vegetation in surrounding areas. Jones noted that plants growing on the structure appear distinct from those just meters away.

Color variations in vegetation can indicate changes in underlying soil composition. Different substrates affect how plants grow and what nutrients they access. Jones suggested the plant color difference points toward an anthropogenic origin rather than natural geology.

Soil chemistry affects vegetation. When underground structures alter drainage patterns, mineral content, or organic material distribution, the effects often become visible in plant health and appearance. Whether these botanical clues support the team’s hypothesis requires further testing.

Measurements Match Ancient Descriptions

Dimensions of the Durupınar Formation align closely with descriptions found in biblical texts. Measurements show the structure spans approximately 157 meters in length, 26 meters in width, and reaches 16 meters in height. Nezih Başgelen, director of the Cultural and Natural Heritage Monitoring Platform, confirmed that radar explorations indicate the structure shares the same length attributed to the Ark in religious accounts.

Ancient texts specify particular dimensions for the vessel that supposedly saved humanity and animal species from catastrophic flooding. Whether those specifications describe an actual ship or represent symbolic measurements has fueled debate among scholars for generations.

Jones and his team find the dimensional correspondence between the formation and textual descriptions compelling. Critics counter that humans often see patterns they expect to find, especially when examining ambiguous evidence through the lens of familiar stories.

A Discovery That Began Decades Ago

Captain İlhan Durupınar, a Turkish cartographer, first spotted the unusual formation in 1959. Severe rains and earthquakes in 1948 had altered the terrain, exposing geological features previously hidden. While examining aerial photographs, Durupınar observed a shape that resembled a ship’s hull.

His discovery captured immediate attention from researchers and believers. For more than 60 years, the site has attracted investigators hoping to prove or disprove claims about its origin. Some arrived with scientific equipment and skepticism. Others came with faith and certainty.

Previous expeditions produced conflicting conclusions. Some researchers declared the formation nothing more than a natural rock outcropping shaped by erosion and geological forces. Others insisted the boat-like appearance and location near Mount Ararat justified continued investigation.

Science Versus Faith in Archaeological Debate

Many archaeologists and geologists maintain that the Durupınar Formation represents a natural geological feature. Erosion patterns, mineral deposits, and tectonic activity in the region can create formations that resemble human-made structures. Pareidolia, the tendency to perceive meaningful patterns in random data, might explain why observers see a ship where none exists.

Jones acknowledges the debate. Speaking to Yeni Şafak, he framed the central question facing his team. “Are we really facing something man-made, or is it an extraordinary natural formation? We need more data to understand this.”

Scientists who dismiss the Noah’s Ark hypothesis point to the lack of artifacts, the absence of definitive wood remains, and the formation’s consistency with known geological processes. Radar scans showing layered structures underground do not necessarily indicate artificial construction. Sedimentary rocks form in layers naturally. Angular shapes appear in fractured rock formations.

Yet Jones and his colleagues argue their evidence goes beyond simple pattern recognition. Soil chemistry, radar signatures, vegetation differences, and dimensional alignments create what they view as a cumulative case worth serious investigation.

Plans for Controlled Excavation

Noah’s Ark Scan announced plans for a controlled excavation at the site. Before digging begins, the team will expand their soil sample collection, conduct core drilling surveys, and perform additional ground-penetrating radar scans. Collaboration with Turkish universities will provide academic oversight and additional expertise.

Jones emphasized that protecting the site takes precedence over rapid answers. Harsh winter conditions and active geological processes in the region threaten the formation’s integrity. Any excavation must proceed carefully to avoid destroying potential evidence.

“Protecting the site is our top priority,” Jones told Infobae, outlining the team’s approach to preservation before exploration.

Core drilling will allow researchers to extract samples from deep within the formation without extensive surface disruption. Advanced scanners can penetrate further into the earth than previous equipment allowed. Geochemical analysis will provide more detailed information about what lies underground.

Between current data and future excavation results, the team hopes to definitively answer whether the structures detected underground formed naturally or through human construction. If artificial, determining the age and purpose of the structures becomes the next challenge.

Questions That Demand Answers

Evidence accumulated so far raises more questions than it settles. Do the angular structures detected by radar represent deliberate construction or fractured bedrock? Does the elevated potassium in soil samples indicate decomposed wood from a massive vessel or organic material from other sources?

Can the three-layer configuration seen in radar scans be explained by natural sedimentary processes? Or does the pattern suggest deck levels within a constructed ship? What created the tunnel running through the formation’s center?

Each piece of evidence invites multiple interpretations. Soil chemistry consistent with wood decomposition could also result from vegetation that grew and died over centuries. Radar signatures showing angular structures might reveal archaeological treasures or merely show how rocks fractured along natural planes.

Dimensional alignment between the formation and biblical descriptions could represent a remarkable coincidence. Or it might confirm that ancient texts preserved accurate measurements of an actual vessel.

Research Continues With Expanded Testing Plans

Research teams will continue gathering data over the coming months. Expanded soil sampling will reveal whether chemical signatures remain consistent across the entire formation. Core drilling will provide direct samples from depths that radar cannot fully characterize. Additional GPR scans using more powerful equipment might resolve ambiguities in current data.

Turkish universities bring resources and expertise that independent researchers lack. Academic collaboration lends credibility to findings while providing checks against wishful interpretation of ambiguous evidence.

Jones and Crabtree plan to compare measurements from inside the formation against samples from surrounding areas. Only a systematic comparison can determine whether observed differences represent meaningful variations or normal geological variation.

Meanwhile, the broader scientific community watches with mixed reactions. Skeptics expect natural explanations will account for all observations once sufficient data accumulates. Believers hope definitive proof finally confirms what faith has long maintained.