Archaeologists believe they've found the remains of Noah's Ark in Turkey
The Durupinar formation has divided believers and geologists for decades, but new drilling is adding fresh evidence to the debate
The latest chapter in the search for Noah’s Ark is unfolding near Mount Ararat , where a research team says fresh core samples are challenging one of the most common explanations for the Durupinar formation.
The roughly 538-foot-long structure has been debated since it was identified in 1959, largely because of its boat-like outline and location in a region traditionally associated with the Genesis flood account.
Geologists have generally regarded Durupinar as a natural formation shaped by erosion, limestone and volcanic material. Researchers with Noah’s Ark Scans , however, say recent drilling has not produced the solid bedrock they expected critics to point to.
“In archaeology, you deal with probabilities, and we’re inching towards where we believe we will have confirmation this winter after our soil analysis is done,” project founder Andrew Jones said.
Core drilling becomes the focus
Jones said the group drilled at more than a dozen locations across the formation.
“They’ve criticized in the past, saying all those scans you can interpret different ways, ‘This is a solid mass of rock, a syncline or a block of bedrock,’” he said. “Well, we’ve core drilled… over 12 locations. We did not find bedrock at all.”
Instead, the researchers say they encountered deposits of rich, dark soil.
Those samples are expected to undergo laboratory analysis for organic material, which the team hopes could help determine whether the site contains traces consistent with decayed wood or past human activity.
“Noah’s Ark was a giant wooden boat, according to the Bible,” Jones said. “As wood decays, you’re gonna find elevated organic matter.”
He added that earlier testing in 2024 reportedly found around three times more organic material inside the formation than in samples taken outside it.
A site with decades of disputed claims
Durupinar has a long history of competing interpretations. Early investigations concluded there was no archaeological evidence proving the site was man-made.
Interest returned in the 1980s when salvage expert David Fasold used ground-penetrating radar and argued that the formation resembled the remains of a ship, though he later publicly rejected that conclusion.
The current team says more recent radar work has identified possible underground corridors and chambers, including one feature extending more than 250 feet.
Researchers ultimately hope to send a specially adapted underground robot into drilled spaces to capture footage and collect additional samples. The next major test will be the soil analysis.
Even elevated organic material wouldn't confirm Noah’s Ark , and natural processes could still explain what researchers find beneath the surface.
What the latest drilling does provide is another set of data points in a debate that has persisted for decades.
The question now is whether those samples strengthen the case for something unusual beneath Durupinar , or simply add another layer to one of archaeology’s most enduring controversies.
