Scientists have found Noah’s Ark.

Our rating

Insufficient evidenceLow confidence

In brief

Researchers report radar anomalies, no bedrock under the formation, and higher organic content inside it than outside. None of this has been peer-reviewed, and lab results are due in winter 2026–27. Until dated wood or clear construction is shown, the honest answer is “not yet known.” We will update this rating when results are published.

5 sources reviewed (1 primary)Last reviewed October 6, 2026By Shawn-Patrick BlandHow we rate

Weighing the evidence

Supports the claim

The formation is about 515 feet long, close to the 300 cubits of .
Ground-penetrating radar shows linear features, right angles and possible voids, according to the research team.
Drilling at more than 12 points reportedly found no bedrock.
Soil inside the formation reportedly has more carbon and potassium than soil outside it.
Ancient writers report that remains of the ark were shown to visitors in the region in their day.

Counts against it

No wood, joinery or datable organic remains have been published.
Geologists Lorence Collins and David Fasold concluded in 1996 that the formation is a natural feature.
Reported carbon figures vary between reports (“three times,” 2.72 times, 40% higher).
The ancient reports point to the mountains of the Gordyaeans (Kurdistan), not clearly to this site.

Discussion

says the ark came to rest on “the mountains of Ararat,” a region (ancient Urartu), not one named peak. The Durupınar formation lies in that region, about 18 miles south of Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey. This year’s field work has put it back in the news.

What was found in 2026

A team from Noah’s Ark Scans, led by Andrew Jones, reports radar images showing straight lines, right angles, layers and possible voids beneath the formation. Drilling at more than a dozen points found rich black soil and no bedrock.¹ A separate team led by Prof. Cenker Atila of Sivas Cumhuriyet University collected about 1,000 soil samples from 150 locations and some pottery fragments; it reports carbon levels about 40% higher inside the formation than outside.² Lab results are expected in winter 2026–27.

What the ancient historians said

One of the most interesting threads is ancient. The Jewish historian Josephus, writing in Rome in the AD 90s, says the ark’s remains “are shown there by the inhabitants to this day.” He quotes the Babylonian priest Berossus, who said part of the ship survived in the mountains of the Gordyaeans and that people scraped off its bitumen to use as charms. He also cites Nicolaus of Damascus, King Herod’s court historian, on a mountain called Baris in Armenia where “the remains of the timber were a great while preserved.”³

So for centuries there was a living tradition of a place where visitors went to see the ark. That is real historical evidence of belief and pilgrimage. It is worth being precise, though: these writers point mostly to the Gordyaean mountains in what is now southeastern Turkey and northern Iraq, the region of the traditional Mount Judi site, not clearly to Durupınar.

The case against

In 1996, geologist Lorence Collins and investigator David Fasold, who had once championed the site, concluded that the formation is a natural geological structure and that earlier “iron bracket” samples were weathered volcanic minerals.⁴ Radar anomalies and organic soil can have natural explanations.

Sources reviewed

secondaryJerusalem Post, Researchers claim radar scan reveals “man-made” structure at Turkey site. Oct. 3, 2026. Link

secondaryFox News, Noah’s Ark team finds no bedrock in Turkey boat-shaped formation drill. 2026. Link

secondaryArkeonews, Noah’s Ark Mystery Deepens as New Discoveries Emerge Near Mount Ararat. Sept. 23, 2026. Link

primaryFlavius Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews. c. AD 93–94. Link

secondaryLorence G. Collins and David F. Fasold, Bogus “Noah’s Ark” from Turkey Exposed as a Common Geologic Structure. Journal of Geoscience Education 44, 1996.