The ashen remains of Sodom & Gomorrah HAVE BEEN FOUND !!!

[astro]

Oh so this guy claims but I have never seen any items about this in the national media. Did I just miss the news or is this guy a crackpot?

http://www.pinkoski.com/sodom.html

http://www.wyattarchaeology.com/sodom.htm

Wyatt Archaeological Research

http://www.anchorstone.com/wyatt/s&g_update02a.html

"Ron Wyatt’s discoveries include Noah’s Ark, Sodom and Gomorrah, The Red Sea Crossing, Mt. Sinai, the Ark of the Covenant and How the Pyramids were built. "

[Wiwaxia]

Ron Wyatt is a Young earth creationist, and he is not an archaelogist, perhaps he could he called “hobby-archaelogist”.
When we find extraordinary claims like his, we should ask ourselves, just like you do, why haven’t I seen this in the scientific press, daily press or the news?

Wyatt will never get his findings published in Nature or Science. Guess why

[DMAAN]

I opened the links provided and I must say I am convinced.

Convinced that this Wyatt is quite the con-artist that is.
I have never seen such a load of bull. All to get you to buy his video or book or tour. I,m really sorry for the gullibly people who fall for this.

Concidering everything relegious he claims to have discovered what will he find next, Gods e-mail address enscribed on a tablet?

sorry for the rant. couldn’t help it.

d

[Wiwaxia]

Fortunately, Ron Wyatt will not make any more claims about finding remains of biblical sites and events - he is dead since a couple of years. I think there are people continuing his work, though :rolleyes:

[Duck_Duck_Goose]

I don’t see a lot of serious archeological information out there on the excavation/discovery of Sodom. I did find this:
http://www.bibleandscience.com/museums.htm

The Smithsonian Institution conducted an excavation of Bab edh-Dhra which many scholars think is the ancient city of Sodom, (See http://www.biblemysteries.com/lectures/sodom/) and Gomorrah is identified with Numeira. Walter Rast and Thomas Schaub excavated these sites starting in 1975 (See ASOR website: http://www.biblemysteries.com/lectures/sodom/)

There’s nothing on the Smithsonian’s website that turns up under a search for either Bab edh-Dhra or Sodom.

A search for Walter Rast turns up: http://vm.arts.unimelb.edu.au/report/babedhra.htm Evidently there’s a site there (tombs, etc.), but nobody knows whether it’s Sodom or not.

Anyway–what I was going to say, originally, before I got sidetracked by Google, to see if archeologists really had found Sodom, was that I remember being told in Sunday School way back when (which would have been in the 1960s) that “we know where Sodom and Gomorrah were, because there are the remains of the burning fiery brimstone, which is sulfur, all over the ground there.” Or words to that effect. So I see that Ron Wyatt has at least mentioned this on his website.

http://www.wyattmuseum.com/cities-of-the-plain-02.htm

Ron Wyatt was not the first person to discover brimstone near the Dead Sea. When William Albright and Melvin Kyle set out to find the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah in 1924, they, too, found these pieces of brimstone at Southern end of the Dead Sea.

“…a region on which brimstone was rained will show brimstone. Well, it does; we picked up pure sulfur, in pieces as big as the end of my thumb. It is mixed with the marl of the mountains on the west side of the sea, and now is to be found scattered along the shore of the sea even on the east side, some four or five miles distant from the ledge that contains the stratum. It has somehow scattered far and wide over this plain.” “Explorations at Sodom” by Dr. Melvin Kyle, 1928, pp. 52-53.

So I don’t see where he’s deserving of any credit for discovering anything at all. Period.

All his photos of “buildings” look just like eroded Badlands-type formations to me.
http://www.wyattarchaeology.com/sodom.htm

, Ron found that within these cities are building-like structures, all completely composed of ash.

How, and why, would you make a building out of “ash”? And, there are some formations/buildings that do look more rectangular than others, like they might actually be buildings, but he doesn’t say where any of them are actually located. I’m wondering if he’s maybe looking at some ruins from other eras, like the Roman period.

And at least one of his photos has had the outlines of buildings helpfully filled in, so we can see it better. Sheesh.

On the western side of the Dead Sea lie the remains of two ashen cities, one at the base of Mt. Masada, and the other at the base of Mt. Sodom.

The only “city” that’s at the base of Mt. Masada that I can find is the Roman siege camp. Photo of it.
http://www.bibleplaces.com/masada.htm

Siege Camp
A solid wall was built surrounding Masada and connected the 8 Roman camps. It was 6 feet thick and 7 miles long and built to prevent escaping.
An estimated 9000 soldiers plus support personnel and slaves conducted the siege.
Szoltan discovered the first Roman siege camps in 1932.

Mt. Sodom isn’t really a “mountain” but a salt diapir, or a sort of pinched-off salt dome. Photo of it.
http://www.deadsea.co.il/map.htm

A 12 km geological ridge of pure salt in the southern part of the Dead Sea, believed to be the infamous biblical city that perished together with Gomorra. Features unique salt pillars dubbed Lot’s Wife, whom biblical legend says became a pillar of salt when she looked back on the destruction of Sodom and Gomorra.

No mention of a “city” at the base of it.

Note: This is a “tourism” website, hence the statement that this ridge of pure salt is the Biblical Sodom. (BTW, don’t miss the Masada Sound and Light Show! Tuesdays and Thursdays, April through October! )

[casdave]

Try a more authoritative source.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/apocalypse_gomorrah1.shtml

All that this site says it that there is a scenario possible that could match the legend and provides the evidence, but it certainly makes no claim to finding the sites themselves.

[Caracticus_Potts]

*Originally posted by Wiwaxia *
**When we find extraordinary claims like his, we should ask ourselves, just like you do, why haven’t I seen this in the scientific press, daily press or the news?
**

For the same reason that the events of the bible–which seems should be of incredible historical significance–are found in the bible but in no other historical texts.

Perhaps fire is not actually the most important discovery of humankind … maybe hallucinogenics are?