The Ark and the Darkness

Most here give a bad review simply because they do not believe that a global flood occurred and that there is a God at all. This is where all of them come from. But there is ample evidence of a global flood by just listening to the dialogs in this documentary film. It's very well thought out and gives skeptics a real workout on how to refute it. Basically comes down to you either believe in God or not. Since even many atheists believe in a God whether not a personal one but just one that started everything goes to show that it's very very hard to explain all this evidence without one. Beautifully done, well explained and with a plethora of historical and archaeological evidence everywhere, you would have to just be ignorant to not see that something really big happened 4000 years ago and we are going to experience another very very soon. Nothing questionable, no nudity, or foul language, great for the whole family. Enjoy!!

A petition to those who are tempted to give 1 star, simply because they have heard the one fact that the movie is pushing back slow evolution: watch the thing. I have seen it over and over in the past years through my ministry, that those type of documentaries receive 10 stars or 1 star, with literally no spectrum in between. It is a matter of etiquette to watch & vote, or not to watch & -NOT- to vote.

I give 9 stars, based on the following pros & cons:

PROS

+ Great production quality.

+ Well investigated and clearly presented facts.

+ Good selection of scholars, without the pseudo-critical injections sometimes found in other documentaries, while leaving the viewer puzzled which parts ought to be endorsed.

+ One of the few documentaries which actually teaches the Good Message (towards the end, but with precision and love).

+ Excellent argument that museums intentionally do not show e.g. Dinos & ducks together, and create a twisted and more dramatized version of the whole thing.

+ It is also very important to point out that barely 40 years have passed since the new consensus had been established.

CONS

• It is probably not true that Eden was buried under hundreds of meters of material. The traditionally proposed Lower / Southern Mesopotamia lies barely at 34 meters ASL, while the Karaca Dag location in Upper Mesopotamia, discovered by Spire and this ministry in 2021, and also proposed by CMI some months later as landing site for the ark, lies still only at 498 meters ASL (plateau around the mountain; 1957 meters the mountain itself). 34 meters ASL do definitely exclude any additional layers and 498 meters do not provide much leverage. We often forget that everywhere material got added, elsewhere it needed to go. The flood stripped bare vast regions, while adding substantially to many other regions. I rather suspect by a look at the current condition, that Mesopotamia as a whole lost during the flood a significant substance (except the mountains which rose during and after the flood). Inspiration for another documentary.

• Usage of the later flood date which collides with the pyramids (2518/2348 BC versus the correct 3298 BC in the Greek OT) and 370 days duration versus the correct 360 days (equal to one year, see Rev 11:3, 13:5) provided in the Greek OT (from 27/02 until 27/02 = exactly one year, not from 17/02 until 27/02). A small detail, but a stumbling block for some unbelievers.

• I would have wished to see a little bit more on the abyss, e.g. To have a quick look at Ringwoodite, and to mention with some words the probable connection between the Pacific Ring of Fire (as localization for the underwater fissures) and the nearby Gran Canyon.

• Another very interesting point would have been the 2 great land bridges (Bering btw. Russia & US, 45 meters BSL; and Doggerland btw. Europe & GB, 35 meters BSL) which clearly existed until the flood.

Overall highly recommended. A wonderful documentary and a blessing to the world.

Utter drivel, vegetarian t-rexs roaming around the mythical garden of eden with the even more mythical Adam and Eve. This really could be called comedy if the people claiming to be doctors weren't so serious in their narrative, Christian marketing has taken note of the popularity of Graham Hancock and co and the ancient aliens format to bring the feeble minded the oxymoronic science behind genesis, if your so desperate to believe well this is for you you'll get all the snappy science class PowerPoint presentations you can handle with pretty good CGI to be honest for the attention deficits out there, I live in middle earth and my best friends an orc.

There's quite a simple test to understand if somebody is a man of God. If somebody operates with love, and they can communicate their truth while accepting others truth, then they are like God, and they are one of gods people. Unfortunately, at least 2 of main narrators in this film are very much filled with hate, they are men of distraction and distortion.

I personally am a believer in the flood, and I don't think that the Bible is a terrible account of it either. But trying to prove facts that have been distorted over thousands of years isn't helping their case.

Given many other accounts which have surfaced, a better interpretation of the Bible in particular of the flood or that God in the Bible is aliens, you can quite literally replace the word God in the Bible with aliens and have a much more accurate account. They spend a lot of time talking about the lifespans of humans, well that's what happens when you have a race that lives 1000 years and they interbreed with a genetic stock here that lives much less time.

There's no mention of carbon 14 dating, and it's quite a sad charade of trying to make a literal interpretation of the Bible seem plausible by pretending that the only arguments are the ones that they can attack.

Overall, I enjoyed this film and watched it twice, I pray that the authors hear find love in their hearts as Jesus wants them to.

Wow. I am just simply awestruck by this so-called documentary that I thought to be, from the description, a scientific collaboration of geologists and historians about the flood myth. I thought it was going to present varying views, as many research studies have been produced on the topic (combined with literary and oral traditions that span cultures and religions throughout the world) to show that there likely was in fact a major deluge at some time in human history in the Mediterranean world, which by the way was the known world at that time. It is so far removed from either in all aspects. I actually created an IMDB account just to comment.

As a former Biblical Scholar with a degree from Yale University in this subject, the circular logic is astounding. Starting with the assumption that the Bible says as much and is therefore truth, followed by claims that use the Bible as the sole evidence for these arguments is just absurd. There is literally zero extra-biblical evidence or perspective in the film, nor is there any scientific research or counterfactual included whatsoever. It begins with the reasoning that the Bible says there was a flood. It then proceeds to use the Bible to confirm it's own null hypothesis...for those of you who are actual scientists or researchers.

As someone who is both Christian and a historian of the Bible (don't get me started on that separate level of analysis alone in terms of historicity and interpretation), I find this film insulting to critical historians and Christian believers as well. It negates the value of biblical literature as one source of human history by asserting that a single document is the sole truth and account of humanity.

I gave the film 5 starts out of 10 for a reason. I would have given a rating of 1 star. Based on it's deceitful marketing and nonsensical presentation. However, as a current lobbyist who argues for a living and spins webs of propaganda into debatable talking points, I am dumbfounded by the sheer brilliance of these "researchers" in the film. Just in complete awe. I have to respect that along with their dedication to perpetuating this mythos.

As I stated above, as a former scholar of the Hebrew Bible and New Testament, I wholeheartedly believe their starting point is just blatantly missing the point of what these "divine" texts intend.

We are not meant to interpret the Bible or any other holy text literally. Even the ancients, at their time of collectively writing the "Bible" that later became canonized texts (based on political reasons under the Roman Empire), did not take these accounts literally. Again, there is no space or time here to delve into so many details. But, current biblical apologists simply miss the point.

Accounts of God, Heaven, miracles and so forth were not meant to be "scientifically" proven by modern-day believers. In my honest opinion, this dilutes the intended message that was understood even by the numerous original authors of the biblical texts. It just defeats the purpose. Faith is a completely different concept than proof. If evidence existed to humans of biblical accounts, faith would be irrelevant. Faith is what believers hold dear for the very fact that there is not proof. Attempting to prove biblical stories totally misses the point - both for us currently and for the ancients living in biblical times.

I could write books on this topic, but I'll end here. For those who need to prove the Bible through supposed "scientific research," I would question your own faith. The two are irreconcilable. For those who need proof, faith is nonexistent by definition. For those of us who question and rely on science, no amount of faith will ever suffice. I neither deny nor affirm any absolutes. I find solace personally in living in the realm between belief (or faith) and reason.