A tourist attraction meant to captivate children ended up with one of them being beaten up.

China’s flagship robots have shown to malfunction so much that it is hard to take the showcase from February as seriously as before, and now they are endangering children.

‘The humanoid was described as a “Jerk clown robot.”‘

Months ago, Unitree, one of China’s leading robotics companies, was showing off moves that seemed both futuristic and flawless. Now, the cracks have begun show in the models, along with the distinct possibility that they are being used as spy machines.

The latest hijinks from the Unitree G1 model took place at Children’s Day in Xinjiang, China. The public seemingly lined up at the popular tourist spot called the Urumqi Botanical Garden, Newsflare reported, to see a kung-fu demonstration from one of the humanoid bots.

While performing a routine, a robot fitted with a blue wig took just seven seconds to kick a nearby child in the stomach.

RELATED: ‘Anti-clanker’: Why millions of people are cheering this android’s humiliation

The routine was seemingly stopped, with the robot slowly backing off as it was likely being controlled in some manner.

The bot was described as a “jerk clown robot” by Russian outlet RT, which reported that while the child “was not seriously hurt,” his mother complained that staff at the event were slow to react.

Days earlier, children were presented with similar robots in a “Waste-to-robot” event for kindergartners in Huaibei, Anhui Province, of China. Children crafted their robots out of waste for a presentation, before getting getting their hands on one of Unitree’s expensive ($13,500) G1 bots.

The event was a celebration in the lead-up to Children’s Day.

In late May, another G1 took a stumble seen around the world during an attempt at a Michael Jackson dance routine.

RELATED: China debuts ‘scary’ martial arts robots capable of backflips and weapons training

Feng Shufeng/VCG/Getty Images

While dancing to the classic song “Billie Jean,” a G1 face-planted on a flight of stairs and remained motionless until it was embarrassingly dragged offstage by a staff member.

A different dance routine went off the rails in February when a street-performer bot took a tumble. The robot flailed as the likely owner tried to grab it, resulting in a swift kick in the face that reportedly left the man’s nose bloody.

Axios reported on research last year that showed there was public-facing spyware installed in some of Unitree’s robots, meaning anyone with the proper information could view live camera feeds without login credentials through the bots, specifically Unitree’s G01 robot dogs.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Robots, China, Xinjiang, Unitree, Tech 

Will artificial intelligence disrupt and revolutionize the betting industry moving forward?

Some companies are looking to answer that question ahead of the 2026 World Cup, by compiling data and feeding it through AI agents.

‘Are soccer fans better off with AI rather than simply going with the odds?’

One such company fed Anthropic’s Claude Sonnet 4.6 over 1,200 data points to predict every match in the World Cup and determine the outcome.

The analysis from Action Network delivered 57 pages and more than 19,000 words on who would win which match, mapping out an entire bracket for soccer fans.

AI predictions

Using “international form, World Cup history, squad market value” and “coach profiles,” the in-depth look from Claude had France as the winner over Argentina in the final.

World Soccer Talk took a similar approach with Google Gemini and included analysis of style of play, performance under certain climates, squad depth, and manager performance. The AI spit out Spain as the most likely winner of the tournament. However, asking Gemini for a simple prediction straight up would have garnered the same outcome, with Spain winning 2-1 over France.

RELATED: FIFA president reveals why World Cup tickets are so expensive — because they can be

FRANCK FIFE/AFP/Getty Images

Microsoft CoPilot figured the consistency, “elite depth,” and pipeline of talent were reasons enough to predict France as the likely winner, according to AS.

An “unusually strong blend of factors” such as prime-age talent and an “established possession-based system” were among the factors ChatGPT gave to place Spain as the likely winner for 2026, in a 2-1 win over France.

The only AI to go slightly off-the-board was Grok, which cited “unmatched” squad depth coupled with elite attackers as the reason why Brazil will likely win the tournament, 2-1 over France.

AI versus the house

By using either complex analyses or even simply posing the question to chatbots, are soccer fans better off with AI rather than simply going with the odds?

The short answer is no.

Gamblers will steal lean with their intuition and real-life knowledge of the teams, and while these reports could assist in completing a bracket, casual or for-fun bettors are just as well off to go with the favorites.

Most odds-setters have listed Spain and France as neck-and-neck favorites to win, typically around +450.

RELATED: Computers are now depreciating slower than cars — the reason is enraging

Luke Hales/Getty Images

Grok going with Brazil to win it all — which is listed as the fourth or fifth favorite behind England and sometimes Argentina — is the only outlier of the popular chatbots that did not go with a favorite.

What this likely means is that the information that is publicly available and provided to the chatbots is essentially the same; this is not the same as an NFL team using their own internal scouting data to find their next draft pick — this is chatbots farming the same data used by odds-makers and coming to similar conclusions.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Ai models, Artificial intelligence, Chatbots, Gambling, World cup, Tech 

President Donald Trump joined Kristen Welker of NBC News’ “Meet the Press” in a Wisconsin barn for an interview that aired on Sunday, covering a wide range of topics, including the war in Iran, Israel’s escalating attacks against Lebanon, the economy, and the prospect of the Federal Reserve raising interest rates.

It became unmistakably clear nearly 40 minutes into the interview that the American president’s patience had been sapped by Welker’s incessant needling and contradictions.

‘You know that these elections are rigged.’

Late in the interview, Trump defended his proposed “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” which would provide compensation to victims of government weaponization, making whole those who’ve “been hurt so badly by radical left lunatics that worked for the Biden administration and Sleepy Joe.”

Welker — whose approach does not appear to have undergone any refinements following her humiliating interviews with Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio — responded both by concern-mongering about restitution going to certain Jan. 6 protesters and by pushing back against the president’s characterization of ex-FBI Director James Comey as a “dirty cop.”

The NBC News talking head proceeded to claim, repeatedly, that the president’s narrative regarding the Jan. 6, 2021, protests was baseless. Welker stated that there was “no evidence” that there were FBI agents ushering Jan. 6 protesters into the Capitol; “no evidence” that there were “dirty cops” on the scene; and “no evidence” that the Biden administration had sent innocent people to prison.

RELATED: Spencer Pratt’s 40,000-vote lead vanishes in Los Angeles mayor race as California continues counting ballots

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Welker then attempted to pivot to a different subject, but Trump refused to let her have the last word on the matter.

“There’s a lot of evidence,” said Trump. “Listen to me: There’s tremendous evidence. There’s nothing but evidence.”

“Well, it’s not been presented in a court of law,” said Welker.

Trump, unfazed by Welker’s many interruptions, stated, “The election was rigged. It was a dirty election — and it’s happening again right now in California.”

Welker tested Trump’s patience again only to find that she had exhausted it.

After she said there was no evidence of improprieties in the California elections, Trump said, “They’re crooked just like you’re crooked, your press is crooked. And ‘Meet the Press’ is crooked.”

“To be fair, I’m not crooked,” said Welker. “But let’s continue.”

“Really? Well, you play right into their hands then,” said Trump. “You’re either crooked, or you’re stupid.”

“You play right into their hands with this stuff. You know that these elections are rigged,” continued the president. “Your network knows that they’re rigged. Do you know that I won an election in a landslide, and I got 94% bad press. You know why I got that? Because you have no credibility.”

The sputtering talking head’s attempts to salvage the interview proved to be in vain as Trump was properly incensed.

“Your elections in this country — we’re like a third-world country. Your elections are crooked, and you’re crooked, and ‘Meet the Press’ is crooked,” said Trump. “And so is ABC and CBS and CNN. You’re one-sided, crooked networks. Let’s call it quits. I’ve had enough. Thank you, darling. Have a good time.”

Welker complained about having to travel “all the way” to Wisconsin for the interview and pleaded with Trump to stay. After leaving her with some advice — “straighten out your press” — the president rose to his feet, stepped on his lapel microphone, and marched off.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​California, Donald trump, Election, Fake news, James comey, Jan 6, Kristen welker, Meet the press, Nbc news, Stolen election, Politics 

Pride Month is underway, and no one is more excited for it than the Boston Public Library — as the library is kicking off the month with a schedule of 19 drag queen story hours for children.

“Children and families are invited to come and celebrate Pride Month with drag queen Ms. Patty for a fun-filled story hour of songs, stories, and more!” one advertisement reads.

Another advertisement boasts a “bilingual drag story time with Just JP” — which is for children just ages 3 and up with an adult.

“A bilingual story hour celebrating Pride Month that raises awareness of gender diversity, promotes self-acceptance, and builds empathy through an enjoyable literary experience,” the advertisement reads.

“Sin induces insanity too. If we look at the Boston Public Library, it’s hosting 19 drag queen story time events. I had to double check that. Nineteen drag queen story time events for children during Pride Month,” BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey says, shocked.

The age limits for the different drag story hours range from 18 months to 5 years old.

“Now, when you think about what a drag queen is, it is a man with prosthetic breasts, with fake nails, with huge hair, with lots of makeup, performing in this case for children,” Stuckey says, asking, “Now, what good reason do we have to present a cross-dressing man that uses a character version of femininity to perform to children?”

“There is something inherently sexual about drag. Don’t let anyone tell you different, that it’s just about inclusion, it’s just about something different, showing kids that it’s OK to be different. No, it’s sowing confusion, and it is sowing seeds of weird sexuality from a very early age. There’s no good reason for it.”

“This is all funded by the taxpayers in Boston. I just want to remind you of that. As of this month, the city faces a budget deficit of nearly $50 million,” she adds.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Relatable, Allie beth stuckey, Boston, Drag queen story hour, Lgbtq, Pride month, Relatable with allie beth stuckey 

Former reality TV star Spencer Pratt was on track to advance to the November general election for mayor of Los Angeles against incumbent Karen Bass. However, over the weekend, third-place challenger L.A. City Councilwoman Nithya Raman began to make substantial gains amid California’s week-long vote-counting process.

Pratt appeared to have a strong lead over Raman on Wednesday, one day after the election, with over 40,000 more votes. That lead slowly shrank over the next several days, dropping to a 33,000-vote lead on Friday.

‘43,000, huh? Where have I seen that number before…?’

Raman jumped from roughly 111,000 votes on Wednesday to 197,000 as of Monday morning, allowing her to squeak past Pratt by just over 3,000 votes, according to the Associated Press.

“On election night, Pratt led Raman by about 40,000 votes — roughly a 10-point advantage,” KTTV reporter Matthew Seedorff stated. “As of tonight, Raman now leads Pratt by about 3,100 votes, a net swing of more than 43,000 votes since Tuesday.”

“43,000, huh? Where have I seen that number before…?” Pratt replied in a post on social media, sharing a screenshot of a March article about the 43,699 homeless people living in Los Angeles. “Probably nothing.”

Nearly one week after Election Day, California has counted only 83% of the votes.

The AP has not yet reported who will go head-to-head with Bass in the runoff race.

RELATED: Spencer Pratt and Nithya Raman shrink Karen Bass’ lead in tight race for LA mayor: Poll

Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times/Getty Images

The final polls leading up to the election showed the three candidates separated by a few points.

A survey conducted May 19-24 by the University of California Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies and co-sponsored by the Los Angeles Times gave Bass just a one-point lead over Raman and a four-point lead over Pratt, which the Times referred to as “statistically insignificant” for the incumbent mayor.

When asked which issues matter most to them, nearly all of the surveyed Pratt supporters expressed concern about waste and political corruption, as well as crime and public safety. Meanwhile, Bass and Raman supporters, who provided similar responses, stated that they prioritize protecting immigrants, moving the homeless indoors, and building more affordable housing.

RELATED: Democrats unleash ‘secret weapon’ to go after Spencer Pratt in a last-ditch effort to end his campaign

HIGHFIVE/Bauer-Griffin/GC Images

While the mayoral race is nonpartisan, Pratt, a registered Republican, has run an impressive campaign in the Democratic stronghold city where only 15% of the population is registered as Republican.

Voters will begin receiving mail-in ballots for the general election in early October.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​News, Spencer pratt, Karen bass, California, Los angeles, Nithya raman, Politics 

Several U.S. servicemen say they were screened for mental illness after refusing the COVID-19 vaccine.

They are given a voice in the documentary “Duty to Disobey,” which showcases stories from current and former military members who were seemingly treated with malice under the Joe Biden administration.

‘An 11x rise in neurological deficits after the vaccine.’

The production comes from Children’s Health Defense, an organization founded in 2007 that was chaired by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. from 2015 to 2023.

Cattle call

In the documentary, military members described the mass amount of vaccines they were given during their service time, with one describing soldiers as being “lined up like cattle” to receive shots they never agreed to.

Much of the documentary’s first half touches on the history and duty of those in the military to lawfully disobey orders, the primary thesis of the film. Some examples like the Abu Ghraib prison as well as the My Lai massacre during the Vietnam War were provided as instances in which soldiers were criticized for not refusing unlawful orders.

“In court, it is never a defense to say, ‘Well, I was ordered to do it,’ if you knew it was unlawful,” said Nick Kupper, retired U.S. Air Force master sergeant.

RELATED: D-Day drama ‘Pressure’ celebrates forgotten values

Shocking numbers

The film also discussed Gulf War syndrome and linked it to the anthrax vaccine as an example of when disobeying an immunization would have proved beneficiary to service members. Veterans Affairs says, “Further research has found no evidence that links the anthrax vaccine with illness among Gulf War Veterans.”

The film follows discussions with armed forces members like Dr. Theresa M. Long, a lieutenant colonel in the United States Army who said she experienced a medical practitioner’s lifetime of epidemiology in terms of vaccine side effects.

This included heart attacks, strokes, and even multiple sclerosis in young soldiers as a result of the vaccine, she claimed.

Pete “Doc” Chambers, a retired lieutenant colonel and Green Beret for the U.S. Army, said that Long alerted him to internal statistics about the vaccine side effects and was just as shocked to see the numbers.

“1,100% — an 11x rise in neurological deficits” after the vaccine, Chambers claimed, which refers to abnormal neurologic function in a specific part of the body, caused by injury or dysfunction in the brain.

Doc also said that after he and Long exposed the true nature of the injuries, the internal network went offline, and figures were presented differently once the service went back online.

RELATED: ‘Glowing orbs’ disclosed in military UFO docs — 10 feet in front of an intelligence official

LEX EDELMAN/AFP/Getty Images

‘Insider threat’

Several people featured in the documentary said they were tested for mental health issues when they dared to link the mRNA vaccine to medical problems they were having. A former major and chaplain said he was taken for a mental evaluation after being told he must have something wrong with him if he thought his heart problems stemmed from the vaccine.

A staff segreant was described as an “insider threat” in internal documents that said he may have been “potentially radicalized by an anti-US government group in the wake of his refusal to take the COVID vaccine.”

“Duty to Disobey” is an eye-opening production that provides relatively shocking information even to those who may go into their viewing having already agreed with its premise.

At just over an hour, the documentary goes into potential remedies for the former members that suggest job and schooling offers and updates to the U.S. military’s religious accommodation process.

However, the bulk of the piece centers around the extraordinary stories and hardships suffered by servicemen during the COVID-19 years.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Lifestyle, Vaccines, Military, Covid-19 

Patriots are just weeks away from celebrating the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, marking America’s semiquincentennial.

Many citizens are clearly proud of the globally transformative superpower bequeathed to them and keen to honor the contributions and sacrifices made by generations past. There are, however, a great many who alternatively look back on American history with ingratitude and down at the country as currently constituted.

‘Let’s pay for one-way tickets.’

According to a new national Elon University poll conducted by YouGov between April 30 and May 4, 55% of Democratic respondents said that there is another country on Earth that they would rather live in than the United States today. Only 10% of Republicans said the same.

Overall, only 35% of respondents said in the run-up to America’s 250th birthday that they would prefer to live elsewhere.

When asked which term best describes how they feel about America turning 250 years old, 68% of Republicans said they felt proud; 19% said they felt grateful; 3% said they felt conflicted; 1% said they felt frustrated; 1% said they felt disappointed; and 9% said they had no strong feelings.

When similarly asked to describe their feelings, only 18% of Democrats said they felt proud; 17% said they felt grateful; 21% said they felt conflicted; 6% said they felt frustrated; 15% said they felt disappointed; and 24% said they had no strong feelings.

Asked specifically about their pride in the country — about the veracity of the statement “I am proud to be an American” to them personally — Democrats again came across as contemptuous. Only 26% of Democratic respondents said that the statement was “very true”; 22% said it was “somewhat true”; 21% said it was neither true nor untrue; 18% said it was somewhat untrue; and 12% said it was very untrue.

RELATED: The Bill of Rights is the antidote to soft despotism

Kevin Carter/Getty Images

The Republican respondents signaled significantly greater pride in their homeland: 83% said the statement was very true; 12% said it was somewhat true; 4% said that it was neither true nor untrue; 1% said it was somewhat untrue; and zero respondents said that it was very untrue.

Whereas 85% of Republicans rated the health of American democracy as either excellent, good, or fair, Democratic respondents overwhelmingly — 64% — rated the overall health of U.S. democracy today as poor.

Democrats evidenced their low regard for the country in other answers, including to the question: “How successfully or unsuccessfully do you believe the United States is currently living up to its founding ideals?”

Fifty-four percent of Republicans said that the U.S. has very successfully or somewhat successfully lived up to its founding ideals; 20% said America has neither been successful nor unsuccessful in this regard; and 26% said it has been somewhat or very unsuccessful.

Democrats disagreed with their friends across the aisle in the extreme: 74% of Democratic respondents said the U.S. has been somewhat or very unsuccessful in living up to its founding ideals; 11% said it has been neither successful nor unsuccessful; and 14% said the country has been either very or somewhat successful in living up to its founding ideals.

“As the United States approaches the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, Americans have complex and diverse feelings about America 250,” said Jason Husser, director of the Elon University Poll. “Many Americans expressed significant concern about the health of American democracy today, and the country is split on its outlook over the next 50 years.”

When conservatives caught wind of this poll, many advocated for helping the Democratic majority realize their dream of living in another country.

Mike Davis, the founder of the Article III Project, wrote, “Let’s pay for one-way tickets, anywhere in the world, for all of them. And 6 months of living expenses. But they must renounce their American citizenship. And never come back.”

“Trump should launch a national program to help that 55% achieve their dreams — help them out with flights, the job search, and maybe even a few months of rent in their new home,” tweeted Nathan Roberts, the co-founder of Save Heritage Indiana. “Long term, this will save our country LOTS of money.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Poll, Polling, America 250, Anniversary, Semiquincentennial, Democrats, Republicans, Pride, Nationalism, Patriotism, Politics 

There is a peculiar kind of intellectual cowardice that disguises itself as “skepticism.”

Instead of asking questions, engaging with evidence, or — God forbid — actually picking up the phone, it fires off a dismissive post and lets the crowd do the rest.

To Jones, it is highly possible that this anomaly indicates ‘the corridors of a ship.’

Lately, the target of this cowardice is a man named Andrew Jones. His offense? Daring to propose that a boat-shaped formation in the mountains of Eastern Turkey may just be the remains of Noah’s ark.

Jones, whom I recently interviewed over video chat, will be the first to tell you he is not an archaeologist.

What he is, however, is the project coordinator for one of the most methodical investigations of a potential archaeological site in recent memory — one being conducted by geologists, geophysicists, soil scientists, and archaeologists with decades of experience between them.

Jones has lived in Turkey since 2020, building relationships with Turkish universities, navigating government permitting processes, and assembling a team capable of doing this work the right way.

And for all that, he is being rewarded with mockery on the internet.

Wyatt’s folly

For many critics, Noah’s ark research begins and ends with one man: the late Ron Wyatt.

Wyatt, a Tennessee nurse anesthetist turned amateur biblical archaeologist, has become the universal escape hatch for anyone who doesn’t want to engage with legitimate, peer-reviewed Noah’s ark research.

Never mind that Wyatt also claimed to have found the Ten Commandments and the Ark of the Covenant. For critics, he has become a kind of all-purpose scarecrow: Invoke Ron Wyatt, roll your eyes, and the conversation is over.

One of the strangest things about the criticism is the assumption that Ron Wyatt somehow created the Durupinar story from whole cloth.

In reality, the site’s Noah’s ark connection predates Wyatt’s fame by decades.

It was discovered in 1959 by Turkish Army Captain Ilhan Durupinar during an aerial NATO mapping mission. A Turkish-American ground expedition followed in 1960, covered in a spread in Life magazine. This was documented, publicized, and treated as a legitimate subject of inquiry before Wyatt was anywhere near it.

Signs of life

The site itself is a boat-shaped impression in the earth about 18 miles south of Mount Ararat. It passes the eyeball test. It doesn’t look natural.

But more importantly, it sits in a valley loaded with Armenian and Urartu historical artifacts, such as abandoned churches and old graveyards.

Just recently, according to Jones, a Turkish archaeologist visiting the site found pottery fragments.

“Maybe 50 feet away from the site, he [found] pottery just laying on the ground where the locals are plowing,” he recalls.

The archaeologist dated the fragments to the Early Bronze Age and Late Chalcolithic. “This is the age you’re looking for for Noah’s Ark,” says Jones. “If you’re doing biblical chronology, they would place it during that time period.”

Jones is careful not to overstate the significance of these finds, noting only that they demonstrate human activity during the same time period as Noah’s ark.

These aren’t irrelevant, peripheral details. They’re central to the flood story. Because if the biblical account places Noah’s landing in the region of Ararat, which it does, then the valley floor below Durupinar is precisely where you would expect civilization’s earliest post-flood fingerprints to be.

Which brings us to the first target of the critics: the site’s location.

The Ararat question

Wes Huff, a Christian apologist with a significant online following, recently posted a lengthy critique of the Durupinar project.

He claims that “the modern site of Mount Ararat has only been called that since the 13th century” and that “the broader issue is that the precise location of Ararat remains unknown.”

This is the kind of claim that sounds clever and smart if you don’t actually know anything about the subject.

When the Bible says Noah’s ark came to rest in the “mountains of Ararat,” it is describing a region: the Armenian Highlands. And the Durupinar site is squarely inside the highlands. This is not a fringe interpretation. It’s basic historical geography.

The word “Ararat” in the biblical text is not a reference to a single volcanic mountaintop. It is a transliteration of Urartu, the ancient kingdom that spanned what is now Eastern Turkey, Armenia, and Northern Iran.

“If you look [at] the Bible, it says Urartu, which is Ararat,” says Jones.

The Urartu people were the predecessors of the Armenians. Their capital sat at what is today the city of Van in Eastern Turkey, on the shore of Lake Van. Their ruins, castles, and settlements are scattered throughout the entire region, including in the valley directly below the Durupinar site.

The implication of treating Ararat as fundamentally unknowable is that any candidate site can be dismissed before it is seriously investigated.

Going to ground

Huff’s second major line of attack targets the methodology, specifically ground penetrating radar. His claim is that “you simply don’t know what you’re looking at with GPR alone.”

This is technically true, which is exactly why nobody on Jones’ team has ever argued otherwise.

But Jones does challenge what he sees as a widespread assumption that GPR is used to bolster “sensational claims.”

As Jones explains, “A lot of scientists [and] archaeologists [and] geologists use GPR. … It’s not the final word, but it helps you understand what’s going on below the surface.”

GPR is not the conclusion. It is a step. It is a standard, widely used, non-destructive geophysical survey tool deployed by archaeologists across Europe and the Middle East as a matter of course before any excavation begins. Dismissing it as inconclusive is like criticizing a doctor for ordering an MRI before performing surgery. The whole point is that you look before you cut.

New angles

What the critics also won’t tell you is what the scans have actually found. Because at this point, “we don’t know what we’re looking at” is getting harder to sustain.

The 2019-2020 GPR surveys didn’t just confirm the boat outline visible from the surface. They mapped angular, right-angled internal structures, which may indicate rooms and chambers running the length of the formation.

They used modern digital equipment capable of generating three-dimensional models and sharing raw data with independent reviewers. According to Jones, unaffiliated geophysicists examined the scans and identified several features they considered noteworthy.

Among them was a linear anomaly running through the center of the formation.

Jones is again careful about the distinction between observation and interpretation: “There’s a straight line of voids,” he says. “Now I interpret that as someone who’s thinking this is possibly Noah’s ark.” To Jones, it is highly possible that this anomaly indicates “the corridors of a ship.”

Natural geological synclines don’t produce right angles. Rock doesn’t spontaneously organize itself into rectilinear geometry at depth. That’s the kind of finding that, in any other archaeological context, would generate serious professional interest rather than a dismissive podcast appearance.

What lies beneath

Or consider the 2014 electrical resistivity tomography data, collected by an independent New Zealand researcher. The ERT scans identified three distinct horizontal layers running through the formation. The Genesis account describes Noah’s ark as having three decks. Jones’ team members aren’t the ones drawing that connection loudly. They don’t need to. The data draws it.

In 2025, new analyses of the raw GPR data found what resembled a central corridor or tunnel running through the formation, flanked by side tunnels tracing the interior perimeter of the ship shape, and beyond that, a large central void extending at least 13 meters below the surface.

And then there is the soil. In 2024, Jones’ team collaborated with Australian soil scientist William Crabtree and Turkish geologist Dr. Mehmet Salih Bayraktutan to conduct a formal survey of 88 samples across 22 locations inside and outside the formation. The samples were then analyzed at Atatürk University laboratories.

They found that organic matter inside the formation runs three times higher than in the surrounding soil, with significantly elevated potassium levels consistent with the presence of decayed biological material (specifically wood) rather than the inorganic rock and mountain soil you would expect from a natural formation.

Yet critics routinely reduce years of work by multiple specialists to a single talking point: “It’s just GPR.”

RELATED: 5 reasons this ‘Noah’s ark’ discovery is harder to dismiss than skeptics admit

Heritage Images/Getty Images

Amateur hour

Dr. Jeremiah Johnston, appearing on Michael Knowles’ podcast, went farther than simply questioning the methodology. He implied that Jones and his team were amateurs chasing hype, while claiming he could conduct a proper excavation of the site himself for $500,000.

Let’s think about the claim that the current work being done at Durupinar is all for publicity for a moment.

Jones has spent years in Turkey, building working relationships with the Turkish government, navigating the permit process required for each phase of the investigation, signing formal agreements with a Turkish university whose archaeologist has over 20 years of field experience and has been covered in American newspapers for his other discoveries.

He has assembled geologists, geophysicists, soil scientists, and archaeologists across multiple countries. He has submitted proposals to government bodies and waited on approvals. He has done the slow, unglamorous infrastructure work that actual, serious science requires.

Meanwhile, Johnston went on a show talking about what he would do with half a million dollars.

Geology first

Huff’s accusation that there are no archaeologists on the team is equally misleading.

The work done to date — the GPR, soil sampling, geophysical surveys — all falls under geology, not archaeology. You don’t call an archaeologist to run a magnetometer. You call a geophysicist.

Archaeology becomes necessary when you excavate. The project simply isn’t at that phase yet. The archaeologists on staff have been consulting, reviewing, and preparing. In fact, the Turkish university archaeologist who recovered the pottery fragments from the valley floor was performing the kind of formal pedestrian survey that is the standard opening phase of any archaeological dig.

The critics want to hold Jones to archaeology’s standards while he’s still doing geology. Presumably they’ll hold him to geology’s standards when he starts doing archaeology.

Worth getting right

I am ethnically Armenian. I grew up hearing stories about Noah’s ark resting in Ararat. Until recently, Mount Ararat itself appeared on the Armenian passport. It remains one of the most important national symbols of the Armenian people because of what it represents: the place where civilization began again after the Flood.

I’m not asking anyone to accept that on faith. Neither is Andrew Jones. What Jones is asking is simply this: Let the investigation finish.

The sonic core drilling that will finally produce intact subsurface samples is pending Turkish government approval, potentially arriving this fall. That drilling will either find what Jones believes is there or it won’t. The AMT surveys will either show bedrock in the wrong place to support a natural formation theory or they won’t. The geophysical data will either hold up or it won’t.

What the critics have offered is not a counter-investigation. They have offered no alternative data, no competing site survey, no engagement with the soil samples or the GPR profiles or the pottery finds. They haven’t even picked up the phone to request the data directly from Jones.

If Durupinar is nothing, if it is a geological oddity and nothing more, the data will show that, and Jones has said as much. He follows where the data leads.

The question worth asking is why so many people with such loud opinions about this site are so determined to make sure that data is never fully collected or taken seriously.

​Ararat region, Life magazine, Noahs ark, Durupinar site, Lifestyle, Bible, Biblical archeology, Turkey, Armenia, Old testament, Faith